Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2015/Archive 7

Australia debut, first appearance, and/or guest (inconsistency)
In the last edit of article (4 June 2015, 16:45), user Brandmeister explained his contribution saying that Australia was guest, not EBU member, and because of that he changed Forty countries participated in the contest, with making its first appearance into Forty countries participated in the contest, with  making a guest appearance. However, this is not consistent with infobox data which says debuting countries include Australia, what directly implicates first appearance... --Obsuser (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Surely one can't refute that it was the first appearance by Australia? Nor can one claim that Australia is part of the EBU. What seems to be in dispute is whether Australia might ever make another appearance. And of course, no one-can yet know for sure. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, Australia should not be classified as debuting country but as guest one. This is because even if it makes another appearance, it will not become part of the EBU (and contest, generally). If it even does so, the Eurovision will not be Euro vision any more, and the competition will lose its meaning. Australia is not debuting contestant; it was just a guest introduced for no good reason. --Obsuser (talk) 18:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, the word debut suggests more there will be another appearance? Have any European countries only yet made their debut in the final? Australia was also different in that it did not compete in a semi final. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The "first appearance" wording is confusing, as it may imply that Australia became a regular Eurovision contestant. I propose removing Australia from the infobox, mention in the lead and further clarifications in the article's body would suffice IMO. Brandmeistertalk  18:58, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with that proposal. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added "as a guest" to Australia in the infobox. Alternatively, it could be something like "none (Australia as a guest)", etc, or with an explanatory note. Brandmeistertalk  19:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone could argue that Australia didn't make its debut appearance in 2015. Sure, it may not return, but just because it may only have one participation doesn't mean it shouldn't go in the infobox (do we also exclude Morocco?). I also would not support an explanatory note, as the whole situation is explained further down the page. – Hshook (talk) 03:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * From what I see, Australia could have returned in case of win, which didn't happen. So no return in 2016 and likely in subsequent years, unless new invitation appears. Brandmeistertalk  07:20, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, the infobox does show in the debut line that Australia is a "guest", thus adding explanation they are a "guest" and not a regular participant. Secondly, the EBU did say that if Australia won in 2015, that they would be allowed to participate again in 2016. Thirdly, it has been reported that the EBU are looking into allowing Australia to become a "regular" participant, despite the geographical location. Fourthly, despite the "Euro" in Eurovision, have we forgotten that Morocco (Africa) took part, Israel (Asia) takes part, Lebanon (Asia) nearly took part. This has been an unorthodox and surprise twist to the Eurovision, and the infobox was never designed to take into account of there ever being a "guest" nation. So we either modify the template so that it has a "guest nation" field - especially now that the EBU have said they would consider future guest nations; or we leave Australia in the "debut" with the (guest) notation, but then on the 2016 article in the withdrawn field show as "Australia (2015 guest)" to cover our asses.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk 23:20, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

And what states that Australia will not become "part of the EBU" is easily discredited. They are a member of the EBU, an associate member, which is still membership in some form or another. To stipulate that the nation was introduced for no good reason, may be considered as a pointy matter of personal opinion - something which WP:POINTY and WP:NPOV discourages us from achieving. There is always a reason for everything in the world, and the fact the EBU and ORF invited Australia is their reason which everyone else loved, but one is clearly objecting to because it takes away the "Euro" in Eurovision. We all live under the same skies, live on the same planet... and it was Eurovision-kitsch niceness to see Australia in the competition after they have followed with passion for over 30 years.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk 00:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Opening Act (Final)
When the woman played the violin in the beginning, there was a picture of a man on the back of the stage (just before the screen was removed and the ORF-Radio-orchestra was revealed). Who is that man? David1776 (talk) 20:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That was Udo Jürgens, Austria's last artist to win the contest in 1966 who died last December. --  [[  axg  // ✉  ]] 20:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Sortable table
Table about candidate cities/venues should not be sortable because its part Failed bids gets sorted too, what we don't need... Can someone exclude Failed bids from being sorted, or I will change the code from sortable wikitable to simple wikitable... It is also case with other Eurovision Song Contest related pages. --Obsuser (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Don't know when and who made the table sortable, but I have now fixed the table code. These tables have never been sortable before on previous articles, and was definitely never sortable on this one.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk 19:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * You could have been WP:BOLD and fixed these yourself, you know!  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk 19:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Opening act
In the part where opening act is mentioned (in the article's infobox), is it correctly written Semi-final 1 and Final? And can anybody resolve my previous question, please? --Obsuser (talk) 19:14, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean as the question is rather ambiguous. But I will answer it in the two ways that I have interpreted it. If you mean should it read "semi-final", then yes. British English hyphenates the words 'semi' and 'final' when making reference to semi-final. However if you mean should the inofbox separately list the opening acts, then that too would be yes. This is a practice done on previous annual articles. We depict the opening act for each of the shows. Wasn't there an opening act for the second semi-final? If so, then we have not mentioned that, nor the interval act for the semi-final 2.  Wes Mouse  &#124; T@lk 19:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was thinking about whether it is correct or not Final itself (bolded in my prev. comment), and should it be written there Semi-final 2 or something, but I've checked out and it's OK. :) Obsuser (talk) 20:15, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2015
In the infobox, please change the director's name from Kathrin Zechner to Kurt Pongratz (as according to IMDB and the official Eurovision credits ).

Mthowells200130 (talk) 20:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ❌. IMDb is not a reliable source, per WP:RS/IMDB, as the content is user-submitted and often subject to incorrect speculation and rumours.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  21:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)