Talk:Lebanon in the Eurovision Song Contest

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lebanon in the Eurovision Song Contest/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi, I will be reviewing this article for GA. I think it is a very nice little article that is well referenced. My main question is the following:

• When you say "broadcaster" as in "Its broadcaster, Télé Liban" do you really mean network? A broadcaster sounds like a person, whereas you are referring to the broadcast company or network. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

It refers to the network, but regarding Eurovision, we tend to say a country's "broadcaster" I think probably because that is what the sources refer to it as. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

O.K. I had to read through it a couple of times before I understood it. To a new reader unfamiliar with the subject, Télé Liban can sound like a person, a broadcaster. So I didn't understand it was a company until I pieced it together. I would suggest you think about clarifying that. Otherwise, the article is very interesting and fulfills all the requirements of a GA. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll look at it and see if there is anything I can do. I'm surprised how long it took to get a review, it didn't seem like a hard or long article to assess lol. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I wikilinked to "broadcaster" which describes it. Will that do? Or I could do "broadcasting organization" without links. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The wikilink needs to be disambiguated as it goes to a disambig page. Or broadcasting organization would do. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll do "broadcasting organization", but anyway I thought that the disambig had a quick definition of broadcaster. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: —Mattisse (Talk) 22:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no...

What, an article about something that doesn't exist? You might as well write about the Swiss Navy or a Female Pope. Oh wait, those have already been written... Lampman (talk) 01:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Lebanon was all set to appear and was then forced to withdraw. It was even well covered by the media. What's the problem? Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 01:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Hm, maybe I should have used a similey. Here it is: :) Lampman (talk) 21:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

So you asked a question just for the sake of asking a question? lol. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 00:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Notability

I am not convinced that an article about something that didn't happen meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. This might have made a few lines in Wikinews four years ago, but surely not notable. And only two WP:RS for the whole article? Suggest merging into Eurovision Song Contest 2005 Jezhotwells (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Additional sources added. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not disputing the fact that Lebanon entered and then withdrew from the contest. Just that an article devoted to this would seem to be unnecessary. It is like having an article on the fact that Syria has never entered the contest or that Bosnia-Hercegovina has never won. It is just one event - notability is conveyed by more than one verifiable thing happening. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

We delete articles about countries that would like to compete and can't, or countries that could theoretically join, but don't. In this case Lebanon entered the contest and withdrew which still leaves an amount of specific detail that would be inappropriate for the main ESC 2005 article. Its not like a Syria article which would just say that Syria can't enter, but wants to or whatever. Since this was only a one time entry, Lebanon in ESC 2005 redirects here where all information relevant to Lebanon can be found, though it actually would be more consistent to have the two pages. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The story about the entry and pullout in 2005 is notable enough for it's own article. Formatting the story in the format of "X in the Eurovision Song Contest" makes sense since eventually they most probably rejoin the competition and it's fits nicely into Template:Eurovision countries and Category:Countries in the Eurovision Song Contest.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Errors

There is an error in the article or communication problems between TL and EBU. TL could only be scared of herrassments. Lebanon competes at Miss World and broadcast the Israeli contestant during the presentation show with no problems whatsoever. Even at the Olympics, including the parades of nation, Israeli delegation is shown on tv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miskolc10 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lebanon in the Eurovision Song Contest. 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/20081106152847/http://esctoday.com/news/read/3279 to http://esctoday.com/news/read/3279
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081001233215/http://www.esctoday.com/news/read/3485 to http://esctoday.com/news/read/3485
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081001220612/http://www.esctoday.com/news/read/3951 to http://esctoday.com/news/read/3951

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) 12:43, 19 December 2017 (UTC)