User talk:Dimsar01/2019 Archived

ESC 2020
Please participate in the talk discussion instead of edit warring. Basically, by listing the countries, you are implying that they could potentially compete next year; that is original research. WP:FUTURE is very clear about what can and cannot be written about future events. Grk1011 (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not edit warring; I'm reverting content removal for no reason and I don't imply anything. Nothing is implied in Wikipedia. If you understand something else, that's your problem not mine. And have a look at the article's talk page again. Thanks. —Dimsar01 Talk ⌚→ 21:16, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The reason is "unsourced content", which is an automatic removal, but I also added additional comments since I think it's not encyclopedic either. You could source that they participated the year before, but I don't think it would be possible to find a reliable source about that participation meaning they may therefore compete next year. Grk1011 (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Your edit to List of Melodifestivalen presenters
Dimsar01, I have been on a wikibreak, and just returned to notice you revered an edit here. I see you're an experienced editor here. Before making changes, might I suggest you look into the matter a bit closer before you hit the revert button. Your statement of "There has been no merge and there is no information about the presenters in the Melodifestivalen article" shows that you were abit too quick to see what was done, why and perhaps most importantly when.

My edit was done as part of a merge request and back in 2016 when this redirect was put into place the content was properly moved into the main article based on a request and consensus to move. It appears that sometime after the merge, a well respected administrator Amakuru removed the list from the main article due to it's lack of any references and because the main article achieve FA status without it, and it did make it a bit more murky. While in retrospect I agree with his subsequent removal of the material, we might differ on if the content should have been outright disgarded or if it should have been brought back into the separate list article. However I believe, and Amakuru can correct me if I'm incorrect, but seeing as how the content was lacking of any references, I would agree that delete versus move was the appropraite action for that content. And instead of discussing your reverting of actions done both by a request and consensus and subsequent clear admin action, you mudied the waters by simply boldly making the change without notification of either of us, nor the origional people who suggested the merge in the first place.

I hope this doesn't come across as too strong, but I believe you've been around here long enough to know how to do a little research and see why, how and what was done. And perhaps consider including other people before reverting what they've done when they too are established editors and/or admins. Cheers Tigger Jay&thinsp; (talk)  21:09, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi thanks for pinging me, and I agree with what you say. Certainly the list of presenters had no place in the featured article (and really any article) due to its lack of referencing. I also personally think a long list of that nature is excessive for use in the main article. Any section on presenters should be mainly prose rather than in list format, and should have encyclopedic commentary on the presenters. Whether the list should be there as a standalone page is borderline. I think List of Melodifestivalen presenters might be a case of WP:NOTREPOSITORY, but it might be worth testing that out with a listing at WP:AFD to get wider community consensus. Thanks  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's true that I didn't look into the matter very much. So, yes I think it has to be fixed, but I suggest instead of redirecting it back to Melodifestivalen, deleting it (since there's no info regarding the presenters in that article as it's already been said). Friendly regards —Dimsar01 Talk ⌚→ 23:49, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest 2019
Even though we weren’t eye to eye, I do want to thank you for your opinions and attributions on the specific topic, as well as the article as a whole. So, thank you. 🙂 「Robster1983」 ☞ Life's short, talk fast ☜ 23:07, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Apple Inc.
Hello ,

You've been identified either as a previous member of the project, an active editor on Apple related pages, a bearer of Apple related userboxes, or just a hoopy frood.

WikiProject Apple Inc. has unexpectedly quit, because an error type "unknown" occured. Editors must restart it! If you are interested, read the project page and sign up as a member. There's something for everyone to do, such as welcoming, sourcing, writing, copy editing, gnoming, proofreading, or feedback — but no pressure. Do what you do, but let's coordinate and stay in touch.

See the full welcome message on the talk page, or join the new IRC channel on irc.freenode.net named. Please join, speak, and idle, and someone will read and reply.

Please spread the word, and join or unsubscribe at the subscription page.
 * RhinosF1(chat) (status)(contribs) and Smuckola on behalf of WikiProject Apple Inc. - Delivered 15:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Show times on Eurovision Song Contest 2019 page
Hey,

I’m a little confused by your revert of my edit to the ESC 2019 page adding the semi-final and final show times to the infobox.

- On the substantive issue, I couldn’t find the times elsewhere on the page. (Remember that on mobile, the sections aren’t expanded by default.) I now see that they are in the “Participating countries” section. Do you think it is reasonable to expect that someone coming to the page only to find the show times will know to look in a section called “Participating countries”? I would suggest that it isn’t reasonable, and that in general the page has too few sections, with a lot of information crammed into one section. It doesn’t cost anything to add more sections and thus make the page more accessible.

- On a meta-point, who is the “we” to which you refer? Is anyone outside the (presumably small) group included in the definition of “we” wasting their time making edits to ESC-related pages on the English-language Wikipedia because they will probably be reverted by you or others in this group? Kennethmac2000 (talk) 19:37, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! Sorry if I was not very clear. If you check above each show's table the times are mentioned. By "we" I mean all of the editors; to be more specific, the date parameter in the infobox is only for the dates and not the times. —Dimsar01 Talk ⌚→ 19:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I already acknowledged that the times exist - but only in a section called "Participating countries". If you view the page on mobile, you only see the top-level section headings, unexpanded, and it is not obvious at all that the times exist anywhere on the page. Even setting the topic of the times to one side, having details of the shows in a section called "Participating countries" doesn't make sense. As a constructive improvement, I have split the "Participating countries" section into two - "Participating countries" and "Shows". I hope you won't feel the need to revert this too. Kennethmac2000 (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It would have been nice if you had continued the conversation here before reverting my edit. I read the advice page you linked to and have a few thoughts:
 * The page you linked to is a WikiProject advice page. Wikipedia advice pages are described here. As someone with over 3000 edits, I'm sure you're aware of what advice pages are and what they are not. This excerpt from the WikiProject Council is helpful:
 * ...in a few cases, projects have wrongly used these pages as a means of asserting ownership over articles within their scope, such as insisting that all articles that interest the project must contain a criticism section or must not contain an infobox, or that a specific type of article can't be linked in navigation templates, and that other editors of the article get no say in this because of a "consensus" within the project. An advice page written by several participants of a project is a 'local consensus' that is no more binding on editors than material written by any single individual editor. Any advice page that has not been formally approved by the community through the WP:PROPOSAL process has the actual status of an optional essay.
 * In other words, your reversion of my edits, as if the Eurovision WikiProject advice page is binding on every editor of the English-language Wikipedia, has no grounds. The fact that you do it summarily without discussion and without any attempt at compromise makes it even worse.
 * If we assume, for the sake of argument, that the Eurovision WikiProject advice page does have the status of holy writ, the "Contest by year" section of that page actually says nothing about where information on the shows belongs (never mind the times of shows). The word "show" appears only once, in the description of the "Format" section - which one might think is a more logical place to locate information on the logistics of shows (such as dates and times) than in the section about the participating countries.
 * Further, if we again assume, for the sake of argument, that the Eurovision WikiProject advice page does have the status of holy writ, I am making the reasonable point that:
 * Upon opening the page, it is non-obvious and non-intuitive - including and in particular on mobile devices - where to find details of the shows, and in particular the show times.
 * Assuming that the aforementioned is true (which I believe it objectively is), it is incumbent upon the members of the Eurovision WikiProject to take this feedback on board and do something about the issue.
 * I would contend that the Eurovision WikiProject is not fit for purpose if it cannot take on board reasonable feedback and adapt - rather than just shutting down anything which deviates from 'how things have always been done around here'.
 * That all said, as stated above, the Eurovision WikiProject advice page does not have the status of holy writ, and you do not own the Eurovision Song Contest 2019 page any more than I do. I would therefore like to discuss this matter with you and see if we can reach a compromise; otherwise, I will just make the edits again. Kennethmac2000 (talk) 20:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the Echo system didn't notify me for some reason. Look, we have a specific format for the page that we follow it (for consistency mainly). This format (= the headings etc.) was made in such way that describes the content of each section. Changing them will only cause confusion. In your edit, when someone would open "Participants" they wouldn't find them, only the ones who competed in previous contests and obviously he wouldn't open "Shows" as it assumingly contains only information about the shows. All these years nobody complaint about this format so I don't see a reason to change it only because one person searched Wikipedia for the times and couldn't find them. —Dimsar01 Talk</b> ⌚→ 20:51, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I now see that the "Participating countries" section is suboptimal in several ways:
 * It doesn't provide a clean list of the participating countries. The section opens, "The EBU announced on 7 November 2018 that forty-two countries would participate in the contest", but there is then nowhere where you can get a list of those 42 countries - you have to scrape the list together from the two semi-final tables, adding in the Big Five and the host country. In addition, countries which are in both a semi-final and then the final are duplicated. If there's going to be duplication anyway, why not have a separate section which simply lists all of the countries participating in a single list?
 * The inclusion of information in this section seems arbitrary. Why are some details of the semifinals and the final appropriate for inclusion in the section, but not, eg, "Semi-final allocation draw"?
 * The show times. It's funny that every other attribute of the shows is allowed in the infobox (dates, venue, presenters, etc) - but not the times. Even though this seems very much like the sort of information someone might want to quickly consult the page to find out.
 * In any case, as you know, and as the English-language Wikipedia rules are clear about, the group (the Eurovision WikiProject group?) to which you refer with your use of the word "we" are not the owners of this page. I am more than willing to constructively discuss changes to the page which balance my point of view with yours, but I'm not willing to accept that the page must stay the way it is with no further discussion simply because you say so.
 * On the topic of consistency, as important as consistency is, it surely can't be that maintaining consistency with previous years' pages is more important than making any improvements to the current page. The world moves on.
 * You're right on that, there are indeed some misplaced sections already (about the allocation draw though, it should remain in the format section). Let's discuss it in the article's talk page and maybe alter the format for the page and for the pages of future contests. —<b style="color: #18b26f;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #282aaf;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 21:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Before I start a new thread on the article’s talk page, which sections do you think are misplaced? Would be good to have at least some common understanding of what can be improved before kicking off a new thread. Kennethmac2000 (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, you haven't said anything more about this - either here or on the talk page of the article. You haven't even answered my question. I'm now left wondering if you proposed moving this to the talk page in the hope that I would get bored and go away. I won't. Either we have an adult discussion about what can be done to improve the page and we both put some effort in, or I will go back to editing the page. Kennethmac2000 (talk) 19:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. When you sent the message, I was really busy adding the results (which takes some time) in the Greek WP and after that a relative of mine passed away and I wasn't on WP a few days now. So, I think the problem is mainly on the participating countries and the shows. —<b style="color: #18b26f;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #282aaf;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 20:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear that. For clarification, do you mean the problem is that the show information is buried inside the "Participating countries" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennethmac2000 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, and that it should be placed in a separate section only with show information (mainly the mini-paragraphs above each show table). And if you have other suggestions for improvements add them as well in the article's talk page. —<b style="color: #18b26f;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #282aaf;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 08:59, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * OK. Should we discuss this on the Eurovision Song Contest 2019 page, or just go straight to the Eurovision Song Contest 2020 page? I have no strong view either way. Assuming an agreement was reached to modify the layout, would you think it would be applied only to 2019/2020, or that it would be applied retrospectively to all previous years' pages too? Kennethmac2000 (talk) 21:19, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Go straight to 2020 and in case of an agreement it would apply on 2020 onwards to avoid messing with 64 articles. —<b style="color: #18b26f;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #282aaf;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 11:55, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Possible GA for the Eurovision Song Contest 2019
I think their is a chance that this could easily claim an GA once the contest is over as it's probably better than the 2013 and 2014 editions which is at GA level. What do you think about it? Matt294069 (talk) 23:56, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * What do you mean and what's a GA? —<b style="color: #18b26f;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #282aaf;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 00:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * GA mean Good Article which is one of the better articles on the Wikipedia. For more info look around WP:GA. In terms of the section, the and  articles are what you call Good Articles and is to date, the only two years that the main page of that article is a Good Article. Matt294069 (talk) 00:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eurovision Song Contest 2020 provisional logotype.png
Thanks for uploading File:Eurovision Song Contest 2020 provisional logotype.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:34, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Eurovision Newsletter for June 2019

 * Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Junior Eurovision 2019
I will confirmed new from Polisy article this news in english language: https://eurowizja.org/szansa-na-sukces-junior-eurovision/ You will return my edit and replace source? It's confirmed. Poland1020 (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, this source confirms it. Go ahead and add it. —<b style="color: #a530ff;">Dimsar01</b> <b style="color: #ff8726;">Talk</b> ⌚→ 21:21, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eurovision Song Contest 1957, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Jacobs ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Eurovision_Song_Contest_1957 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Eurovision_Song_Contest_1957?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)