Talk:Molitva

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	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.

	Serbia Portal Molitva is part of the WikiProject Serbia, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familier with the guidelines. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Why is terry wogans babbling always hsave to be fetured? I shall remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.161.36.45 (talk) 09:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Language of the song

I think the fact that the song is the first song not sung in English that won since 1998 is wrong. The last time a non-English song won was 1995 when Norway competed with Nocturne. The winner of 1998 Diva is considered to be in English, though the lyrics is not that clear. At that time it was compulsory to sing in an official language of the country. The rules changed in 1998 and any language (expect faul) was allowed in the performances. If 1998 refers to this fact, I think it should be clarified. A victory of a performance in another language is indeed remarkable and should be pointed out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.142.215.130 (talk)

[edit] Song quality

I think we should leave the, "It is truly, truly awful" statement in the article. Perhaps it is a bit editorial, but it is certainly factual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unexpect (talk • contribs).

Maybe it should be added that the performer is no beauty ... not that that is imperative, but she looks more like a boy then a girl and stil she won —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.11.219.244 (talk)

I think she looks fine, and sings quite well, but the song is terribly bad. From what little I know about Eurovision I guess that this is typical. Unexpect 22:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

It would be inappropriate to leave in editors' comments that the song is "truly, truly awful." This would be a definite violation of Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view as well as reliable sources and so forth. With that said, if it's as awful as you say, there will be plenty of reliable sources that can be quoted as to their descriptions of the song. For example, even before the winners were announced, National Public Radio here in the U.S. was discussing the contest on "All Things Considered" and said something about the public perception that the winners often are fluff and/or not that good. (Certainly their 2004 story said that in the blurb.)Lawikitejana 23:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Let's consider as an example the song which was ubiquitous some months ago on American radio and television. A leathery prostitute wiggles around and sings about her "lumpy lumpy humps"; this was wildly sucessful despite the undeniable fact that it was worthless trash(along with the lion's share of all popular music). Now, I know it to be true that this band should be dragged into the alley by the scruffs of their neck and shot, but it is NOT APPROPRIATE FOR AN ENCYCLOPEDIA, as it is merely an opinion. A correct one, by all accounts, but still. So let's stick to the facts with this poor Serb. I haven't heard this song because I expect pop music to be godawful, but it is a value judgement (thus POV) to excuse her of being mannish and unattractive, and it is certainly an aesthetic judgements (the POV of all POVs) that the song is godawful. Most popular culture, frankly, is trash. Let's stick to the facts and let Serbia have their fun.--JovanPanić 06:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

People who are unhappy, could you *please* spare readers of wiki your silly remarks. This was surely one of the best songs and performances of the contest. People from many countries voted for it, including Austria (12), Belgium (7), Denmark (6), Finland (12), France (8), Germany (8), and so on. Check it out here: http://www.eurovision.tv/addons/scoreboards/2007/final.html There is no way you can call it a "block vote" or something. If you can't see how this song is good, the problem is evidently not with the song itself, but with your own taste or your bias. Ri hwa won 15:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Geez, the only "terribly bad" and "truly truly awful" parts of this article are the comments above. If you listen to this song and somehow can say that Marija is not a good singer I don't know what the hell you think is good.

[edit] Article name

There is too Russian version of this song called Малитва/Malitva. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.237.7.40 (talk)

In Russian this word is spelled the same way as in Serbian - Молитва/Molitva Ri hwa won 11:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

You should find better name for this entry. "Molitva" in many languages mean "To pray to Lord" - it is religious concern. Please, rename this entry. As you could see on http://www.diggiloo.net/?2007rs11 - English name of this song is "Destiny" - here we have english wiki, we need accurate and english info. --78.0.182.9 12:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Also, it is not only song with same title. look this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqMX55pI6eg - another song with same name (from 2003) by Parni Valjak et Dado Topić --78.0.182.9 12:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the article should be renamed to Molitva (song)? Pretty much all Slavic nations know that this means prayer so it could be confusing. Also, if someone ever makes an article about Dado Topic song, then it could be a disambiguation page, or this song should be the primary article because, after all, it is a Eurovision winner.--Velimir85 13:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

If it is done, then Voda should also be renamed on similar principles. However, I disagree on the proposition. This is the English Wikipedia, and an article about prayer would be called Prayer, not Molitva. There is no confusion. ―Bisqwit 00:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, article should be renamed into: Destiny(Molitva) --Moravek 09:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

So Tornerò should be renamed to "I will return", Loca should be renamed to "Crazy (song)", Hasheket Shenish'ar should be renamed to "The Silence that Remains", etc.? I think the original song name should be prioritized, not its English translation. But, a "(song)" could be added to the name, with a redirection from Molitva. --Bisqwit 10:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rip Off

This song is a rip-off. Just look for the videos on Youtube for proof of that... Gumdropster 17:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh really, its that Albanian propaganda again every time Serbia wins something. This is Albanian nonsense and garbage. Please stop spreading your hatred for everthing Serbian, and if anything, it would be the other way around, with Albanians stealing Serbian music becuase they are know for that, and not only Serbian but also Greek, Macedonian, Bulgarian and Turkish. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.96.218.226 (talk)

Oh please, give me a brake. If there's something about it, then it needs to be published. It has absolutely nothing to do with Albanian propaganda, Serbian hatred etc. etc. etc. I've added a section about the ripoff and other controversial topics. ZLK 19:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

But you just don't know who you are messing with and i do. These people downplay everything Serbian (i am not Serbian by the way, i am Croatian), and resort to ridiculous and low measures such as comparing two songs of which the biggest similarity is the fact that they are balads. There is nothing in common between the two, and its another attempt by Albanian propagandists to taint Serbian success, no matter what it is. It is all political and has its roots in the hatred toward everything Serbian. In 2004 their yellow press tried to taint the success of Zeljko Joksimovic's 'Lane Moje' by comparing it to some Buddhist sound from Asia. That's how far they will go to discredit anything Serbian. As soon as this blatent lie and attempt at fame has passed, this section will be removed. Just as an example, the refrain from 'Molitva' sounds a lot closer to refrain from 'Ostala si uvek ista' by Miso Kovac, a Yugoslavian/Croatian artist, and this song came out some 20 years ago. There are at least 50 other songs from former Yugoslavia that have a closer sounding refrain then this Albanian track. And not only that, but Albanians are known for copying Serbian, Greek, Bulgarian and Macedonian music and calling it their own. This is just pure Albanian garbage.

Pure Albanian garbage? Sorry, but that sounds very unlikely. I'm not Albanian, Serbian nor Croatian. I've heard the comparison between the songs, and there's a huge similarity. It's obvious. "Lane Moje" wasn't at all similiar, by the way. 212.10.91.102 18:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have also heard that Albanian song. Some sounds and pitches were similar, but the difference in general outlook is a difference between day and night. In my opinion, the evidence that suggests it is a rip off is too weak and not convincing. The similarities are probably coincidental as the two pieces merely sound similar instead of them being identical. The similarities weren't that striking. A lot of songs have notes similar to those of other songs, even in Western Europe or North America. If you put two random songs together, the chance of discovering similarities is probably more than 1%, which does not mean they are identical or plagiarised. Even Madonna was found guilty of plagiarism a few years ago and in the 19th century the melody of "God Save the Queen" was used as a national anthem throughout Europe with only the lyrics being different (Germany used it and Liechtenstein still does). Besides, the composer of "Ndarja" states "Molitva" is not a copy. I think the plagiarism issue is a smear campaign. By the way I am Western European, not an immigrant, not of South Slavic decent and I enjoyed "Molitva". --84.26.116.26 18:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Finnish name

The correct finnish title for the song, under which it has been recorded, is "rukous", not "rukoilen". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.157.122.238 (talk)

[edit] I actually quite enjoyed the song.

Indeed I did. And I had a lot of fun last night on my own watching Eurovision, as I do every year. I now own my fourth EV CD, and listening to my favourites. Considering everyone else seems to have ostracised me for my DARING to like something 'so goddamned awful', I think I'll bitch-hermit in my room for a week until something worth coming out for happens. --The only remaining Eurovision fan in the world, Lady BlahDeBlah 19:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I second this opinion. I enjoyed the song. Also, I support the performer's (i.e. Marija's) happiness and opinion on that two things that are Right were witnessed: that the winning song won for its music, not for stage performance (they did not really have any coreographics), and that the winning song was in the performers' native language. I too think that Eurovision should be a music contest, not a hot-or-not contest (nor an international relationships contest); and that its entries should have something particular to the culture they come from, most importantly the language. There were other entries that match these criterias, and I don't comment on whether the Serbian one was the right winner, but I do think it was not a bad winner. Molitva is very good. But, this has nothing to do with Wikipedia! ―Bisqwit 23:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the other two in this section. I am rather fond of the song. I think it's nice to see someone perform a simple song without needing pyrotechnics or curse words to get their point across. TarisWerewolf 12:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is this sentence really benifitial?

"The song is also notable for its stage presentation because lacked dance routines, revealing or showy costumes, pyrotechnics and other gimmicks." All the above elements in that sentence are much more commonly found in uptunes than ballads. In fact I'd go so far as to say that gimmicks would take away from the experence of a well sung ballad. Jon 13:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That might be what the author of that sentence meant.--Hadžija 17:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation

The Swedish newspaper, Expressen, revealed that 2 of the artists performing "Molitva", were doing racial signs live on Eurovision. ^[1] These signs were commonly used by the Serbian military and paramilitary forces during the Bosnian War. There is also a screen capture that clearly shows one of the artists doing the racial signs.^[2]

I have moved the section on "Racial signs" here, because it is complete rubbish. The controversy in some Croatian, Bosnian and Western media says more about those media outlets than anything else. To make an analogy, does wearing green on St. Patrick's Day indicate support of the IRA?--Hadžija 19:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I also moved the "Controversy" section here, as it is original research:

Several videos on YouTube, indicate that the song may just be a ripoff. It's claimed that the Albanian song, "Ndarja", performed by Soni Malaj, is almost identical to "Molitva".^[3] A striking similarity exists between "Molitva" sang by Marija Serifovic in Eurovision 2007 and an albanian song "Ndarja" performed by Soni Malaj in Top Fest 3 in 2006, Albania. It is obvious, they tried to hide their tracks, but there is no doubt Serbia's song is nothing more than a recompilation of an existing song, tunes that we're already familiar with. In other words, the essential part of the song - the refrain, is identical.

--Hadžija 19:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, come on, half of the songs were partly or even as a whole taken from other songs. Why should we always emphasize on the controversy. So what about the Turkish song (I know it's originally a folk song, but still...) then, the Greek? The Ukrainian? What about the vision of the Russians? The song won, it doesn't matter what the reasons were or where it comes from. Envy, envy, envy --Laveol 09:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

STEALING songs is the worst thing ever. I think disqualification is the best option. --Riste Ristevski 21:02, 15 May 2007 (GMT +1)

But half of the songs should have been disqualified --Laveol 19:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Riste, I think your fellow Macedonian pretty much explained it all.--Velimir85 10:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accusations of politicisation

Please read the policy before you quote it to me. WP:V says:

In general, sources of questionable reliability are sources with a poor reputation for fact-checking or with no fact-checking facilities or editorial oversight.

I wonder what a Swedish tabloid's fact checking facilities are for the Serbian salute? Just because one person, or a group of people associate something with a particular person doesn't mean "it is associated" with that person. I mean, we could say that anything to do with Russia "is associated with Stalin/the Soviet Union/the KGB" with about as much validity.

The Serbian salute "is associated with" Serbia, just like St George's Cross is associated with England. Does this mean English football fans are making a reference to the Crusades at every footballing international?

Furthermore, the version I'm reverting to mentions that some view it as nationalistic, whereas your version baldly states, wrongly, that it is nationalistic, period. Opinion writers quite often make statements of opinion as fact, to help make their point, whatever it happens to be. They're still statements of opinion, despite the way in which they're expressed.

Finally, this discussion is hardly taking place on a level playing field, as I don't speak Swedish. Could you translate the article in question?--Hadžija 01:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Dagens Nyheter has the largest circulation of Swedish morning newspapers and does not qualify as a tabloid.

My version stated that the article I was citing refered to the sign as "controversial and nationalistic". First, It's true and verifiable that that's what the article says. Second, I see you also edited the article on the sign itself[1] and the question of it's nationalistic connotations, or lack thereof, belongs on that articles talkpage rather than here.

As for the opinion you refer to, I have none. I know too little about the sign to have any opinion about it at all. That's why I rely on, and refer to, the source.

Två av sångerskorna i Serbiens vinnande bidrag rapporteras ha gjort det starkt kontroversiella, nationalistiska, trefingertecknet i direktsändning. Det traditionella tecknet kom att förknippas med landets förre president Slobodan Milosevic, anklagad för krigsförbrytelser, och betraktas av många bosnier, kroater och albaner som en provokation. Utspelet har väckt upprörda reaktioner från tittare i bland annat Sverige.

Translates (almost word for word) to

Two of the singers in Serbia's winning contribution reportedly displayed the very controversial, nationalistic, three-finger-sign on live broadcast. The traditional sign was to be associated with the country's former president Slobodan Milosevic, accused of war crimes, and is considered by many Bosnians, Croatians and Albanians as a provocation. The stunt stirred outrage from viewers in Sweden and other places.

Regarding the discussion itself here, I don't see it so much as a playing field as an encyclopedia, but I think I understand what you mean. --Bensin 23:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a turn of phrase. Also, whatever is in this article can and should be discussed here. I don't know much about this paper, so if you say it's not a tabloid I believe you (although that is unrelated to circulation: indeed, in the UK the papers with the highest circulation are tabloids). The sign is just a national symbol like a flag, or certain clothes, or a dish or whatever. That "many" Bosnians, Croatians and Albanians considered it a provocation...well, I read on some forums a very angry topic because Šerifović was waving the Serbian flag, another provocation! It says more about the "outraged" than anything else. Furthermore, this article is not a very reliable source, as can immediately be seen by the author stating that "many Bosnians" found it offensive, when half of Bosnia and Herzegovina identifies with the symbol! And to say it is associated with Milošević is like saying Berlin and the German language are associated with Hitler (is this reverse Godwin's law :-)), simply beyond surreal. In a vacuum of information, people'll believe anything, I swear...--Hadžija 00:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The controversy is that Marija Serifovic made the "three finger sign" after Bosnia-Herzegovina gave her 12 points. I actually watched the video several times and that was the only time she made the three finger sign. (The flag is not a provocation. That is nonsense.) Had she not done the three finger sign or had she done it to every nation that awarded Serbia 12 points, no one (most would not) be talking about this topic. The reason many Bosniaks are outraged is since she made the sign after Bosnia awarded Serbia 12 points. I, too, have been reading several forums, the main one being www.bihweb.com It is true that this has been part of Serbian history for many years prior Milosevic, however, nowadays it is associated with him and his politics regarding the Serbian nationalistic uprising (not in a bad way, every nation had it in the early 90s in one way or another). I mean, to some extent, it is like the Croats saying that "Za dom spremni" is not an Ustasa (facist) slogan. In today's world that slogan is more associated with the Ustase, even though Croats argue that the slogan is historical. In conclusion, the issue is that she made the sign after Bosnia awarded Serbia 12, not giving the sign to any other nation. I added the image so that we can see the matter. Thanks, Vseferović 02:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

So what is your point? This symbol is not comparable with "Za dom spremni", mainly because every Croat, Serb & etc knows that phrase is a facist provocation, and will say it in that context (or not, if they're not a neo-Nazi). Whereas every Serb I spoke to about this controversy was at best totally surprised, and at worst viewed it as Serbophobia. Some people just can't seem to get their head around the fact that this symbol is non-political and good natured.

Since you've led us into the realm of original research, I think it's very possible that she was thanking BiH and expressing her hopes for Bosniak-Serbian friendship. She was saying "cheers, mate" and you seem to have heard "fuck you, cunt", given your reaction, which was to bring up war and Nazi puppet regimes (excuse the vulgarity)...--Hadžija 03:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I spoke to you in a civil manner. I simply explained what 99.9 % of Bosniaks think. No where did I say this is my personal opinion. BTW, not every Croat will say "Za Dom Spremni" is a fascist slogan. In fact Croats argue that it is not a fascist slur. Read the article on Thompson's song "Cavoglave". There it is argued it is used as a historical context. However, the song clearly speaks against Serbs. I would say it is used in a fascist manner. The reason Bosniaks see this as provocation is because the three finger sign was used by Cetnik divisions in BiH. Vseferović 04:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The sign itself was promoted during the demonstrations AGAINST Slobodan Milosevic, during the early 90's, and was later widely accepted as a sign symbolising three things - God, King and Country. It is a sign of being proud to be a Serb, and it is not meant to offend anyone. It was used during the Balkan wars of the 90's, yes, but so were flags of each and every country involved, but no one with two digit IQ is considering them a nationalist provocation. And Vseferovic please explain what Cetnik divisions you mean? Cetnik divisions during the World War II couldn't have used the symbol, and I am not aware that there were any such divisions during the last wars. Some paramilitary units called themselves Cetniks, but if you consider Army of Republika Srpska a "Cetnik army" then you are sliding towards nationalist slur very fast.--Velimir85 09:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with Kseferovic. It's used in a fascist manner. I remember my grandfather telling me how the Serbian troops were shooting at them, but as soon as he did "Three finger" sign, he was identified as "friendly". Funny thing... ZLK 07:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The "politicization" section should me removed entirely. A Swedish tabloid is hardly a reliable source, and right now it seems to be the only one to publish this ludicrous accusation. I mean, what will WP turn into if every time an American or British tabloid published a piece of sensationalist crap, which they do every issue, someone make a point of quoting it here? Óðinn 19:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Why did Wikipedia scrap off any reference to the plagiarism controversy from the song page? It was in the initial page (see here a cache copy: http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?p=%22soni+malaj%22&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-501&u=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molitva&w=%22soni+malaj%22&d=QSC-ZfmdOzBY&icp=1&.intl=us then somehow got kicked off the page. Actual plagiarism or not, the controversy is still there and should be mentioned. Is this Wikipedia, or Serbipedia? And yes, I listened both songs and I found a striking ressemblance between them, with the mention that Soni Malaj has a really strong and beautiful voice, unlike Marija. All in all, the Albanian song is way better than the Serbian. It is Soni Malaj who should have won the Eurovision. I am not Albanian.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.106.9.247 (talk • contribs)

Why do you need to justify your ethnicity? Ok, your comment is pro-Albanian, but there's no need for that. So what if you are, you have a right to have your oppinion. Anyway, after the composer of Ndarja said that Molitva is not ripped off, so that pretty much ended the controversy. It surely doesn't deserve a whole section now, maybe only a sentence saying that there once was a controversy.--Velimir85 15:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• I removed the controversy section and the {{disputed}} tag, as the controversy has nothing to do with the song per se, but with the actions of the artist at the voting of the Eurovision. / Fred-Chess 13:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 18TH in Italy?

Have you a source that states that Molitva tuched 18th position in singles chart in Italy, country de facto retired from ESC???--79.3.182.121 (talk) 17:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)