Talk:Ell & Nikki

A real group or just a collaboration?

I am opening this discussion to start things fresh. Ell & Nikki already meet notability guidelines as reviewed here .

But there are still some doubts if they were actually a group or were they just a collaboration? Stee888 has pointed out that they collaborated for one song only and never pursued a career together as a duo-group. So what is the definition of a "group"? What makes Ell & Nikki a group and not just a collaboration between two artists? (like Kanye West and Jay-Z, or Brandy and Monica). Discuss. Bleubeatle (talk) 06:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Focusing on your question I have to say that they did participate as Ell/Nikki at Eurovision. A group name for their Eurovision endeavour. What I am trying to say is that they did participate in ESC 2011 as a group and won the competition and their music single placed in several European charts. Even if they never release any new music singles as a duo we can not say that this article should be merged into their separate articles or similar. This is my last comment on this situation as notability for Ell & Nikki is beyond any doubt as stated before.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any sources that prove this? I would like to have a look at them..just to get more knowledge. Bleubeatle (talk) 11:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Sources? Its all in the facts of the competition. I need no sources to prove that Ell/Nikki won Eurovision 2011 and had a music single that placed high at many European charts. Which is the basis to why the article was kept at the AfD by a wide margin.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, please let the AfD go already. This is a talk page. I was only asking for sources to get more knowledge and insight for myself. Not for proof. Bleubeatle (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

"Do you have any sources that prove this?", are you sure you are not looking for proof?. Im out of this discussion. Its over and done.BabbaQ (talk) 12:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Then you are free to leave if you want.Bleubeatle (talk) 00:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Discussion is not closed yet guys. So if anyone has anything else to put then you are welcome. Also following what has been said in this discussion, a few users agree that merging this article with "Running Scared" could be a good solution. Bleubeatle (talk) 23:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

You're making it sound like everyone who commented in this discussion has agreed to a merger, when that is not even true. The was no official vote procedure concerning a merge; only suggestions. So please, refrain from putting words into people's mouths that haven't been said, it is impolite. Also your remarks to BabbaQ above are very uncivil, and you have been told by several users now to remain civil. You asked BabbaQ to provide sources for to prove that Ell/Nikki performed together. A question like that is very silly really, its like asking if the sky is blue, or if Paris in France. Its an obvious question, with an obvious answer, and this article has all the sources to "provide" your answer, if you bothered to take time to even read them; its called common-sense. Wesley☀Mouse 18:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wesley Mouse, please avoid making anymore prejudice statements about my posts again here at Wikipedia. I have already informed you on that in another page. If you read closely, the section's name is "A real group or just a collaboration?". When replying to BabbaQ's post I assumed that my question was being answered as stated by the user in the first line ("Focusing on your question I have to say that they did participate as Ell/Nikki at Eurovision. A group name..."). I was merely being uncivil in my response because all I wanted was to ask if there are anymore sources(or links) so that I could understand the user's answer more and to be sure that they are an official group and did not just collaborate for this contest. After all, this is a talk page and its purpose is to discuss any suggestions or doubts regarding the article's content. It would be best if you also avoid quoting other users' comments out of context and saying that "You're making it sound like everyone who commented in this..has agreed to a merger". I clearly stated that "...a few users agree..could be a good solution". By 'agreed', that includes being suggested by an individual and other users (keep in mind that it's not everyone) coming to an agreement with that individual's input. As you mentioned, they are suggestions but to assume that I was "putting words into people's mouths", being "impolite" and also commenting on "a question like that is very silly really" is immoral, demeaning and uncivil from what I feel. So please refrain from doing this again because it makes me feel hurt and offended. Bleubeatle (talk) 00:37, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, will you stop casting assumptions that I am being prejudice in my statements, as nothing prejudice has been said. All of my comments are observatory, and I am within my right to write things in an observational context. But you have contradicted yourself by admitting you were uncivil to BabbaQ anyway; so that admittance doesn't make my statement any more prejudice than you state it is. The definition of "agreed" doesn't mean suggestion either; so my comment of "You're making it sound like everyone who commented in this..has agreed to a merger" is perfectly worded correctly and in context too. If your comment of "agreed" as also meant "suggestion" then you should have specified that in your original comment; and not afterwards - we're not psychic. And also how can comments like "putting words into people's mouths", being "impolite" and also commenting on "a question like that is very silly really" be deemed as immoral, demeaning and uncivil? They are clear metaphorical questions; so again, please refrain from casting false accusations that I have been uncivil towards you. If you are starting to feel hurt/offended, then why don't you do what you said you was going to do in the first place, and just drop this whole shenanigans, and stop posting the same questions (all cleverly worded differently) across various areas of Wikipedia. It is becoming very disruptive, and uncooperative. Wesley☀Mouse 01:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Please calm down and read my posts once more. Now that's enough. If you do not wish to get involved in the discussion here then you are free to leave. Bleubeatle (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your assertions and accusations of people being illiterate. Repeatedly telling people to "read posts once again" is very ignorant, and not assuming good faith. And also stop telling people to leave discussions, you have NO right to demand people to leave a discussion that is in open space and where anyone who visits Wikipedia is free to contribute in a fair and open discussion. I don't want to be escalating matters further, but your behaviour towards other editors is slowly pushing me in that direction. Wesley☀Mouse 12:18, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

This is my last post to Bleubeatle. Please we have now tried to reason with you for about a weeks time over and over again. If you asking a question and another user answers, then dont take it as a reason to be rude if the answer isnt what you wanted. Comments like, Now that's enough. If you do not wish to get involved in the discussion here then you are free to leave, will only be seen as insults and will have the opposit reaction to what you claim to want. Sincerely.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Wesley Mouse and BabbaQ, if that is how you felt about my words then I must withdraw those words because my intention was not to offend or trigger an opposite reaction from anyone. I was only expressing how I felt so please don't take offense of them. Also,I agree that you are free to do what you want. Whether it is discussing, asking questions or stating some doubts here in Wikipedia. If you do not support what has been said in that discussion page then that is fine. I respect that but please respect other users' views and contributions as well. If you still want to discuss then you are welcome to stay. If you do not want to then you are welcome to leave. Thanks :-) Bleubeatle (talk) 03:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

If you still want to discuss then you are welcome to stay. If you do not want to then you are welcome to leave., You still continue with that kind of comments even after everything you have been adviced. I am fully aware that I can leave the discussion whenever I like, I dont need for you to tell or decide if I should leave or not. This is an open discussion board and you dont have to advice me or any other users on what to do. Lets move on now Bleubeatle and try to read trough all comments made and come to a conclusion on what you need to change in your way of responding to talk page comments. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Slight input, I agree with the merging solution. In my own genuine opinion, I believe it would be the best option. Cathairawr✝ 19:07, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion a merging is something totally unecessary. And a move highly unlikely to ever get a proper consensus. Ell & Nikki passes WP:MUSIC, and has won the worlds biggest music competition as Ell & Nikki. A merge to the music single article would only be confusing and misleading to the winners actual notability.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Cathairawr. Thank you for your input.Bleubeatle (talk) 03:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

The winners were Eldar Gasimov and Nigar Jamal who both have separate articles already. I don't see how it would be confusing because within the "Running Scared (Eldar & Nigar song)" article it clearly states their real names so they will not be mislead. Bleubeatle (talk) 00:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

We have to agree to disagree on that matter. A merging of the article still seem to be an unnecessary move that would set a strange precedent for all Eurovision articles. I will not support any such move.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Alright then. If that is your opinion then fine. I will respect that. Thank you for your input. Bleubeatle (talk) 03:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

• The duo has now released their second music single. This discussion is now considered officially closed.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• Isn't it a good feeling BabbaQ, to know we were both right after all this time. I think someone owes us both an apology. Wesley ☮ Mouse 15:18, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, sweet!. But I can bet you we will never get it. I have started two new articles today especially one on IsaDora cosmetics a sponsor of the Eurovision 2013. Take a look at them when you got time my friend.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ell & Nikki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.esctoday.com/news/read/16720
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110214012459/http://az.itv.az/eurovision2011/18892.html to http://az.itv.az/eurovision2011/18892.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Stamp

I removed the reference to Germany releasing a stamp to commemorate Azerbaijan's win. The Indian reference (which notably doesn't show the rumoured stamp) is wrong. Germany has never issued a stamp about the Eurovision Song Contest, not even when it has won it (let alone one to mark another country winning). Vauxhall1964 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:30, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

@Vauxhall1964: you could have removed the related source too, and not just the context about there being a German stamp. Talk about doing half a job! lol. Wes Mouse ^Talk 21:47, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ell & Nikki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110214194830/http://www.esctoday.com/news/read/16720 to http://www.esctoday.com/news/read/16720
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130902213033/http://www.1news.az/bomond/bomaz/20130830015349253.html to http://www.1news.az/bomond/bomaz/20130830015349253.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)