Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1993

Proposed merge with Kvalifikacija za Millstreet

Makes more sense to merge the two together, as Kvalifikacija was the "semi-final" of its time, and the Eurovision article does mention the pre-qualification round and also includes the participation table too. Merging would expand that article much better and bring it in-line with the ESC articles since the introduction of the semifinal round in 2004. Wes Mouse  ^T@lk 08:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose: Unlike the 2004-onwards semi-finals, this was seen as a one-off event arranged separately from the main contest, and should be considered such on Wikipedia. Lilduff90 (talk) 21:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Language of the Bosnia and Herzegovina song

I changed the language of the Bosnia and Herzegovina song from "Bosnian" to "Serbo-Croatian". Bosnian language as an official term did not exist in 1993. The official language of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was Serbo-Croatian throughout all of its existence. The first official usage of the term "Bosnian language" came in 1994 with the Constitution of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (a year after this competition). In the Constitution of the FB&H, official languages were Bosnian and Croatian languages (see [1]). So, there is no basis to call the language of the song "Bosnian" when Bosnian language officially did not exist at the moment. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any sources to back this up? As Wikipedia is based around reliable sourcing, although this may be true, all sources we have on the article right now describe the song as being performed in Bosnian. If there are any sources that describe "Sva bol svijeta" as being performed in Serbo-Croatian then I would support changing this, but until then it should remain as Bosnian given that is what the sources we have indicate. In addition, I am struggling to find when "Bosnian" as a term for the language was first used, so while I do not doubt your statement above I cannot verify it; hence the requirement for good sources that back up changes like this. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1993/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Riley1012 (talk · contribs) 01:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I will complete this review within the next week. -Riley1012 (talk) 01:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

1. Well-written

• For the second year in a row the winner... add comma after "row".
• Twenty-two of the twenty-three countries which had participated... should be "that" instead of "which".
• In the late 1980s and early 1990s the Eurovision Song Contest... add comma after "1990s".
• ...by 1992 an increasing number of countries had begun expressing an interested in joining the event... should be "interest" instead of "interested".
• ...and could use instrumental-only backing tracks, however any backing tracks... There should be either a semicolon after "tracks" and then a comma after "however", or this should be split into two separate sentences.
• Following each first rehearsal there was an opportunity for delegates... add comma after "rehearsal".
• An audience was present for the second dress rehearsal in the evening of 12 May... use "on" instead of "in"

2. Verifiable
Earwig's Copyvio check is fine. Sources are reliable and formatted correctly.

• Spot check:

• Source 18 needs to be archived (it's now a blank page)
• No issues: 2, 6, 11, 15, 25, 28, 34, 38, 42, 47, 51, 63, 79, 82, 86

• Are there references for the broadcasts in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Luxembourg, and Turkey? If not, they should be removed from the table.

3. Broad
The article is broad and focused.

4. Neutral
The article is neutral.

5. Stable
This article is stable day-to-day.

6. Illustrated
The images in the article are free and have relevant captions.

@Sims2aholic8: Well done! Just a few minor fixes, and then this should be good to go. -Riley1012 (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@Riley1012: Thank you for your review! I have completed the prose tweaks and corrections as suggested. Regarding ref. 18, I went to find a live version of the same webpage, however I noticed that they had since added that Wikipedia was the original source of the information, so I have removed this source per WP:CIRCULAR and commented out the supported prose until a better ref can be found. I have done a thorough sweep of all other sources and I am confident that this was the only issue.

• Sounds good, thanks. -Riley1012 (talk) 00:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the country broadcasts with missing refs, there are no direct references available for those specific countries, however they would be covered indirectly through the same refs used in the participants table (18 and 19). As an example, while there is no direct source to support the broadcast in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as they were a participant and the contest is a television programme, per the rules of the contest their participating broadcaster RTVBiH would have been required to broadcast the event. The broadcaster in particular is listed on the individual participants pages on the official Eurovision website (ref 18, see here). As a solution these pages could be used to support broadcast information when there are no secondary sources available, e.g. TV listings in newspapers, however I also understand this may be too much of a WP:SYNTH issue, and would understand if your original suggestion to remove these rows from the table still stands. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

• Okay, I didn't notice the broadcasters were listed in another source. That's fine with me, I'll go ahead and pass the article. -Riley1012 (talk) 00:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 16:50, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that with a population of 1,500, Millstreet in County Cork, Ireland, became the smallest settlement to host the Eurovision Song Contest when it staged the 1993 event? Source: "In 1993, Irish broadcaster RTÉ surprised the Eurovision family by choosing Millstreet as host village for the contest. With a population of just 1,500 people it was the smallest place ever chosen to host the contest."
  • ALT1: ... that ahead of hosting the Eurovision Song Contest 1993, BBC journalist Nicholas Witchell referred to the contest venue, the Green Glens Arena in Millstreet, as a "cowshed in Ireland"? Source: "It appeared that not everyone was as excited about RTÉ's choice; BBC news anchor Nicholas Witchell sparked controversy when saying on-air that the contest would be held "in a cowshed in Ireland."""The visiting BBC journalist, Nicholas Witchell, disparagingly said that Eurovision was being held 'in a cowshed in Ireland.' "
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Wayne Jacobs

Improved to Good Article status by Sims2aholic8 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Eurovision Song Contest 1993; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Qualifies for a DYK due to achieving recently Good Article status. Interesting article, good hook. QPQ done. Coretheapple (talk) 23:10, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

We are in WP:QPQ backlog mode. Double reviews are required.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

The QPQ check tool to the right counts only 15. I don't really trust the QPQ tool that much because it barely counts 40% of my own nominations. But If the nominator feels that they have done less than 20 noms this can go forward or they can do the double. This case is on the honor system.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

The tool actually missed three DYKs from 2008, back when DYK acknowledgements were posted by people rather than bots, but that still only gives a count of 18, so this nomination doesn't require a second QPQ. Restoring Coretheapple's original tick. Only another two DYK nominations before backlog mode kicks in. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)