Jump to content

Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1985

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Question

[edit]

Does the 'Adelaide' here refer to a person or a band?--Chuq 06:25, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What Lill Lindfors said

[edit]

I see she's quoted here as saying "...Norway has been last on so many times...". I must say I've always heard it as "...Norway has been last song so many times...". I'm not gonna change it, as who can be sure really, it could be either...but my version kinda makes more sense.... Draggleduck (talk) 05:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tone

[edit]

Most of the article, especially the intro paragraph, doesn't follow style guidelines and seems to read almost as a blog of the event rather than an encyclopedia. --Robinr22 (talk) 15:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1985/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sims2aholic8 (talk · contribs) 16:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a. (reference section):
    b. (citations to reliable sources):
    c. (OR):
    d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Another review for you, will get through this today! --K. Peake 08:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Infobox looks good!
  • "and presented by" → "it was presented by" and I would suggest after this, starting a new sentence at where the contest was held
  • Per overly short size of the second paragraph, merge this with the first para
  • Where is the top five sourced as being the third time?
  • Pipe Sweden to Sweden in the Eurovision Song Contest

Location

[edit]
  • Img looks good!
  • The second staging sentence reads as too long; I think it would be better if after the first comma, you wrote something like "ten years after the 1975 contest was held in Stockholm." only
  • Introduce the full name of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) here with the wikilink since it is the first mention
  • "which was held on the evening of 1 May" → "hosted on the evening of 1 May 1985" to be less repetitive with usage of held

Participating countries

[edit]
  • First para and img look good!
  • Listing all of the participating artists in one sentence with so many clauses feels very excessive especially when there are many areas this could be split up; start a new sentence at the Hot Eyes mention that goes into Al Bano and Romina Power, then one for Chips that ends at Mariella Farré; from these examples, I will let you take it from there and then re-assess
  • Table looks good!

Production and format

[edit]
  • "produced by the Swedish public broadcaster Sveriges Television (SVT)." → "produced by SVT." since their full name has already been introduced; do the same for the EBU
  • Not all of the info for the second para's last sentence is sourced
  • Remove repeat link to the 1975 contest
  • Last para looks good!

Contest overview

[edit]
  • First para and img look good!
  • "when returning to the stage" → "when she returned to the stage"
  • "got caught on" → "and got caught on"
  • [39][7][33] should be in numerical order
  • "win, and marked a" → "win and marked a"
  • Table looks good!

Spokespersons

[edit]
  • Where are the languages sourced?

Detailed voting results

[edit]
  • Good

Broadcasts

[edit]
  • The passive participants part is not sourced by [30]
  • The third sentence of this section does not appear to be backed up by the sources
  • Tables look good!

Notes and references

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  • Good

References

[edit]
  • Copyvio score is not showing, although there is barely any quoting so it is safe as you can get to check this one off!!
  • Wikilink European Broadcasting Union on ref 1
  • I have my doubts about the reliability of ref 4, being that all of the writers are contributors and it is a website dedicated to horses
  • WP:OVERLINK of ARD on ref 22
  • WP:OVERLINK of Leeuwarder Courant and Delpher on ref 56
  • WP:OVERLINK of National Library of Luxembourg on ref 58
  • WP:OVERLINK of National Library of Israel on ref 71
  • WP:OVERLINK of Radiocorriere TV on ref 73
  • WP:OVERLINK of Delpher refs 74 and 93
  • WP:OVERLINK of Dagens Nyheter on ref 81
  • WP:OVERLINK of Timarit.is on ref 91

Bibliography

[edit]
  • Good
[edit]
  • Good

Final comments and verdict

[edit]