Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1992

Map

The map here represents Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, however, this is actually the last time Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia took part. This should be reflected correctly on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.92.99 (talk) 02:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Host venue

Where was the contest hosted in Malmö? The broadcast clearly states it was held in the Ice Stadium (ice hockey arena), whilst the EBU has named Malmömassan (the former exhibition and convention centre) as the venue that year. I believe the confusion is due to the centre being located in the same area as the stadium and arena before moving in the early 1990s. I think we should put this to a discussion? @Pdhadam:, @Sims2aholic8:, @AxG:, @Grk1011:, @Jochem van Hees:, @BugsFan17: and @Information and details: who made the changes here and on the list of host cities. Regards, Fort esc (talk) 20:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Fort esc: The contest was held in the Malmö Isstadion. This is backed up, as you say in the broadcast itself, but it is also listed as the contest venue in Roxburgh's Songs for Europe: The United Kingdom at the Eurovision Song Contest (2020), O'Connor's The Eurovision Song Contest: The Official History (2010) and Thorsson & Verhage's Melodifestivalen genom tiderna : de svenska uttagningarna och internationella finalerna (2006) as well as elsewhere on the official Eurovision website, e.g. this write-up when the contest was broadcast as part of #EurovisionAgain. I understand the official website's page on the 1992 contest lists Malmömässan as the venue, but I believe that you are correct due to the confusion with the move in the early 1990s getting the current stadium mixed up with the Stadionområdet area of Malmö. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 21:19, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Sims2aholic8: Thank you for clarifying this. Fort esc (talk) 21:52, 15 November 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 1992/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Llewee (talk · contribs) 22:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Sims2aholic8, I am excited to review this article. The 1990s were before my time but I have watched Eurovision since I was a child. Though being British that can be quite a upsetting experience. I will make a series of suggestions for improving this article. Please use the  Done template or strikethrough to indicate a problem has been dealt with. Add any comments or questions after the points.--Llewee (talk) 00:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• "The chosen venue was the Malmö Isstadion, an indoor ice hockey arena constructed in 1970, the former home stadium of the Malmö Redhawks ice hockey team and which had also previously hosted concerts by Frank Sinatra and Julio Iglesias amongst others." - I think it might be helpful for readability to break this sentence up (e.g ...ice hockey team. The venue had previously hosted concerts..).

 Done

• "and thus Sweden and the European mainland, from 1999" - Sweden is part of the landmass covered in the linked article. Maybe clarify that it is "the bulk of the European Mainland".

 Done

• "saw each country given a 40-minute slot on stage, followed by a press conference." - I assume this was a mock press conference?

No this would be a series of press conferences in which the delegations would take part where questions would be posed by the various journalists that were in the host city to cover the event for media outlets. For context you can see how this works for present-day contest at https://eurovision.tv/mediacentre/accreditation.

• "the Nöjesteatern [sv] in a performance that" - I think there needs to be an additional apostrophe before in.

 Done

• Is any information available about what kind of viewing figures the contest received or how the media reacted in the countries where it was broadcast (e.g newspaper reviews)?

Given the timeframe of the contest, particularly as this was before the Internet became as widespread as it is now, it can sometimes be tricky to find available sources, and particularly free sources, that would cover information such as this, but I can take another look.

That all for now. Once these issues have been dealt with I will do the source and copyright checks.

@Llewee: Thanks for picking this up! Comments above have been dealt with to the best of my ability. Please do let me know if you have any other questions or comments for me. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Sims2aholic8, I have done a number of spot checks on sources most of which were fine. However, source 31 which is citing Ireland winning the Eurovision song contest seems to be talking about 1984. It's easy to accidently put citations in the wrong place, especially when you have lots of sources covering similar content. I would suggest checking through the citations to insure their aren't any similar mistakes.

Thanks for raising that, I've now corrected the reference to point to the right page (it was missing a "-1" at the end. Looking at the remaining refs I'm confident that there are no further errors and that all content is sufficiently sourced, however please do let me know if you have any other concerns. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• I have also put the article through Earwig Copyvio Detector. It didn't note any issues - eurovision.tv/story/revisit-malmo-1992 got 20% while the rest got less than 10%. You can see the full results here - (https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Eurovision+Song+Contest+1992&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0).--Llewee (talk) 14:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing this. The 20% figure seems to be mostly down to a lot of word phrases which would be difficult to change, e.g. the presenters' names, various song titles, organisations, and "Eurovision Song Contest" as a phrase. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 18:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Johnny Logan

• ... that at the Eurovision Song Contest 1992 Johnny Logan (pictured) became the first person to win the contest three times as either a performer or a songwriter? Source: "He'll always be the original double winner (not to mention his third victory as a songwriter!) but now Johnny's got some company at the top." "Slechts vijf mensen wisten eerder minstens twee keer als artiest of schrijver het songfestival te winnen. Johnny Logan deed dat zelfs driemaal. In 1980 en 1987 won hij als artiest met respectievelijk What’s Another Year en Hold Me Now en in 1992 schreef hij het winnende liedje Why Me van Linda Martin."
  • ALT1: ... that the top three songs at the Eurovision Song Contest 1992 were also the only three entries to be performed in English? Source: "The top three songs were all performed in English [..."] "In 1992 the top three songs were also the only three songs in English in the entire contest."
  • ALT2: ... that of all the countries that had ever participated in the Eurovision Song Contest at that time, only two former participating nations did not compete in the 1992 event? Source: "A record 23 countries took part, with only Morocco and Monaco staying at home."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Billy Garrett Jr.

Created by Sims2aholic8 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Eurovision Song Contest 1992; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Note that the article was not created (as per nomination), but made a Good Article within the last week, which however also makes it eligible for DYK. Article is thus both good and long enough, with an interesting hook (main hook prefered) with no question of reliablity or validity of statement. Good to go as far as I'm concerned, but my review could perhaps be double-checked as a new reviewer. Thismess (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
• Hi Thismess, I had a look as you asked and this was your first review. The review is a bit short, did you check WP:EARWIG for text copyright violations and the images for copyvios? Were there any problems? See Template:Did you know nominations/Umrao Singh Sher-Gil for an example of a review that shows what the reviewer checked. TSventon (talk) 22:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Have checked, no violations could be found. Thismess (talk) 23:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thismess I ran an Earwig report and it shows a 20.0% similarity for https://eurovision.tv/story/revisit-malmo-1992. It says Violation Unlikely, but it is necessary to check the detail. As it was your first review, you are not expected to kbow everything. Some duplications like the Eurovision Song Contest 1992, are not a problem.

Sims2aholic8 several phrases (an indoor ice hockey arena constructed in 1970 and Of all the countries that had ever participated in the Contest and absent from this year's event) seem to be copied from eurovision.tv, could you reword them? TSventon (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@TSventon and Thismess: Thanks for flagging. Rewrites complete, copyvio similarity now at 12%, which as noted is likely down to key phrases which are impossible to avoid. Hopefully this now satisfies that point of concern. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 09:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Sims2aholic8, it looks fine now, I can't see any unnecessary duplication of text. TSventon (talk) 10:27, 5 March 2024 (UTC)