Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1998/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: OliveYouBean (talk · contribs) 09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

G'day, seeing as this article's been waiting for a few months I figure it's about time someone reviewed it. I've already given it a quick read-through, gonna start adding comments in the next hour or so. OliveYouBean (talk) 09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

So I've finished going through the criteria and making notes. Not everything that I've mentioned needs to be changed, I'm open to hearing why you think stuff should stay the same. The most urgent changes needed are: The other notes also need attention, but like I said I'm open to hearing your point of view if you disagree on something I've said.
 * The word-for-word quote I mention in my note on 2d.
 * The "self-published" book I mention in my note on 2b.
 * The inconsistency in the formatting of the references that I mention in my note on 2a.
 * The deadlinks in refs that I mention in my note on 2a.

Thanks for all your work on the article! Hopefully it doesn't take long before it can be promoted. :) OliveYouBean (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for picking this up! I believe I've covered most of the points you raised above, and in particular your urgent changes which required attention. A few explanatory points below which should hopefully alleviate the remaining points above. Happy to collaborate further to get this over the line if you have any further questions.
 * I believe I've fixed any ref inconsistencies you mention. For the BBC/British Broadcasting Corporation references, some references refer to the BBC as a whole as it's either referencing a production or contest background information, whereas other references that refer to the BBC link to BBC News or the BBC Genome Project, which are separate divisions under those titles, and so it wouldn't make sense to expand the BBC to its full title in these instances in my opinion.
 * I don't appear to be having the same issue with accessing the deadlinks you are referring to in 2a. I tried different browsers on my PC as well as on my mobile device, and through the Wikipedia app, and in each case the links are working with no problems for me.
 * I made a few tweaks to the lead as you asked, including some restructuring and additional information as you resquested. However I think the current paragraph structure works well because it gives a more chronological view of the contest, and also keeps in line with the structure of the article, covering production, participating countries, the winner and results in that order, as it appears in the article itself.
 * On a few of the other changes you requested, e.g. the 12 points table, the "other awards" section, the broadcasts tables, these are aspects that are included in every Eurovision by year article, and so they have been included here in this format to ensure consistency across all of these articles. Typically there are more awards presented that are now shown in the "other awards" section, however in 1998 there was only the Barbara Dex award, and other awards which are now presented each year weren't yet conceived. The 12 points table is a long-standing feature of these articles and while it does duplicate information in the voting table, it's also a good graphical summary of each country's favourite act that year, which I believe many readers find beneficical. Likewise for the broadcast tables I believe the split is still quite useful to reinforce which countries were participating in a given contest and then which countries broadcast it as an elective. Happy to continue to discuss these points if you have further questions.
 * For Diggiloo Thrush, as a WikiProject we consider this site as generally reliable for the purpose of outlining languages. The website has also been used in other published works which would be considered reliable (e.g. here) which I believe adds credence to its general reliability.
 * If there are any other points that I haven't covered, please let me know, otherwise hopefully this is enough to get this article passed. Thanks again for your effort in a great review! Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back to this so quickly! I'm happy with all the refs stuff and keeping the lead in chronological order like that does make sense. Also happy with Diggiloo Thrush being a reliable source with that info.
 * With the Barbara Dex Award section I would personally prefer that to be a level 1 heading, but I do understand wanting to keep the same headings across all the contest articles and I can't find anything in the MOS that specifically forbids sections with just one sub-section like that, so I'm happy with that too.
 * Happy with the broadcast tables staying separate, but I'm not so convinced on the 12 points table. The fact that it's been used in the other Eurovision articles doesn't really sway me, and neither does the argument that it helps people see which songs were each country's favourite because the 12 points are already bold in the points table for emphasis. I don't 100% want the table gone, but like I said it's not something I've seen done in the sources used for the article here. I'm not going to fail the article on this being included, but I think it should at least have a reference in that table to verify that the 12 points are all correct (even if it's just the same as a reference used in the detailed points table). OliveYouBean (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your flexibility with these points! I've now added references to that table as suggested. I certainly understand your perspective on this, however I am somewhat hesitant to change the format this significantly across all articles. I've tried this before with other aspects of these articles and have subsequently had to revert the changes back to the original way to assuage public opinion. However removing the 12 points tables going forward is definitely something I will raise at a WikiProject level to determine if there is consensus in removing, because as you say it is somewhat duplication of effort when the 12 points are already bold in the table above. Hopefully for the time being this compromise is suitable to get this article now passed as GA. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to promote this now. Thank again for all your work on the article! :) OliveYouBean (talk) 01:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)