# Talk:Russia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2000

This review is transcluded from Talk:Russia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2000/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 01:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

 

Hi, I'm Kingsif, and I'll be doing this review. This is an automated message that helps keep the bot updating the nominated article's talkpage working and allows me to say hi. Feel free to reach out and, if you think the review has gone well, I have some open GA nominations that you could (but are under no obligation to) look at. Kingsif (talk) 01:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk page shows stability. Article history looks like it's still being tightened up, or has in the last week, but nothing bad.
The photo of Alsou needs an upright parameter.
Are the photos of the Globe Arena, Ell and Nikki, and Samoylova really needed? The relevance is tangential in the first place, the corresponding text doesn't need illustration, and it's a lot of photos for a relatively short article.
Tables, quote box, infobox all good illustration
The paragraph-ending sentence In a 2016 Wiwibloggs poll called "What is your favourite Eurovision song from Russia?", "Solo" finished in third place with over 700 votes. has no inline source. Are there other statements without sources like this?
Continuation

Continuation
Is the Russia's least successful result... sentence in the background really needed?
Prose/phrasing could be better, but is not bad and can be understood. Good enough for GA.
The quote in the "Internal selection" section would be better in-line, just a sentence on the end of the preceding paragraph of "The ORT president said..."
We don't need a full list of the entrants (the According to the Eurovision rules, the 24-country participant list... sentence) - just explain why Russia could enter in 2000 when they had missed a few years.
When mentioning Russia petitioned for Denmark's disqualification, article should probably mention Denmark won.
Kingsif (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)


### Overall
Kingsif, thanks for picking this up! I've covered all of the points you raised above (added upright parameter, removed the photos and added the source to the last sentence). Please let me know if what I've done is ok or if you have any other suggestions. Danilmay (talk) 06:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - I saw that you were active but hadn't responded so I thought I'd wait for acknowledgement. I will do a source check next, and then go through finer prose details; if you have any comments at any point, please leave them! Kingsif (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
@Danilmay: Hi, would you be able to start addressing sourcing concerns before I get into a prose review. A general comment on the prose I've noticed so far though is that "the" is missing in a bunch of places, so adding that as you go through would help. Kingsif (talk) 01:40, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, I've addressed most of your concerns. The only question is what did you mean by the question "Can they all be cleaned up?" and the word "actual source"? If you are confused by the fact that many sources are available through Integrum, I want to say that Integrum is, in fact, a news database, like, for example, newspapers.com, so I don't see any problems with using this site.
Notes on sources:

#10: I removed the two sources that were next to source 10 and added a source that says 2000 submissions of songs were received by ORT.
#31: I don't think it would be possible to add more context from the source to the article, because I didn't find the context for the phrase "...and featured Alsou, dressed in a pink glittery outfit designed by Maria Grachvogel" in the book. I also corrected the page number, grammatically tweaked the second quote and removed the first quote.
#35: I have slightly altered the arrangement of sources in this sentence. Source 34 now supports the first part of the sentence, and source 20 supports the second part of the sentence because text in the source says almost the same thing as in this part of the sentence.
#39: I don't think it's worth adding a note that Macedonia has changed its name, because this in fact has nothing to do with the subject of the article.
#59: Rephrased
If there are any other points that I haven't covered, please let me know. Danilmay (talk) 10:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

@Danilmay: Thanks for that. While I'm familiar with what Integrum is, my understanding is that it may ...wash... what it hosts, so not just like newspapers.com . In any case, my main concern is first the accessibility (.ru being of its own mind), and second, the point of using a host when the original source should be available. As I said, I doubt that the only place one can read the (English) Cambridge Evening News is through a Russian site. Other replies: ah, a slight typo has confused re. #31 - content, not context! There is more about the dress etc. in the source, and it's possible to add some more info, no? Re. #20, yes, you're right text in the source says almost the same thing; as I said, that's not a good thing. That's a WP:COPYVIO. Re. #39, no? Even though the source has a different name for the country and some well-intentioned editor may endeavour to make them match? Kingsif (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Danilmay: and @Kingsif:. I noticed on ESC project alerts page that this review has been languishing for a month. Any way I can help? Grk1011 (talk) 13:48, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
I note that in the last month, @Danilmay: has filled out more citation parameters, I suppose I'd like to hear their views on the rest of the source points in my recent paragraph; then it's time for a prose review. Which could be quick (everything looking good), but could throw up other issues. If you're familiar, Grk, I am sure everyone would appreciate someone combing the article for its focus - does the article cover all the important parts in sufficient detail, and does it not go off-topic. Kingsif (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Kingsif! I apologize for not responding for so long. Anyway, I've improved the prose in the article and filled out more citation parameters, so I hope the article looks better than ever now.
Comments on your concerns:

1. If you are confused by the fact that the sources are not available to you, then this does not mean that I will change the sources to available ones, since its unavailability for some users does not necessarily mean that the source cannot be used. You also said that you are "familiar with what Integrum is". Then can you please explain what you mean by the word "original source", because, apparently, you know more than I do and you know where to find it and how to find it.
2. There is nothing more to add about the dress, because there are very few sources about it and there is no information significant for adding to Wikipedia in them.
3. Rephrased
4. See MOS:MAC. In historical contexts referring to events between 1992 and 2019, Wikipedia articles will continue to refer to the country by its then-current official name, i.e. "(Republic of) Macedonia". Danilmay (talk) 08:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
If I can't conduct a source review for the majority of the references, I can't conduct a review and this will fail on procedural grounds. It's also concerning when most of the sources aren't the original source, but versions of them hosted on a news aggregator ... that favours Russia. If your stance is firm, you can ask at WT:GAN for another reviewer to take over; hopefully they'll either access the platform or, if unable, also uphold WP:V and ask the same. Kingsif (talk) 18:16, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, I thought about your complaints with a calmer head and I think they make sense. I'm thinking about the option of ordering scans of newspapers to provide them to you, what do you think about this? Danilmay (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

That's suitable; per V, the sources don't have to be permanently accessible to everyone (though this is of course preferred). Kingsif (talk) 22:18, 17 June 2023 (UTC)


### Status query
Kingsif, Danilmay, where does this review stand? It's been almost six weeks since the most recent posts here and edits to the article. It would be great to get this nomination moving again. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

It could procedural fail to let Danilmay have time on the sources since the article hasn't been edited. You know I can take a holistic view at keeping reviews open if they can be productive, though; I'll leave it up to you whether to close it or not. Kingsif (talk) 19:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, I wrote to the WikiProject Resource Exchange on Russian Wikipedia and they said they would provide scans next week, so there is no need to close the review. Danilmay (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

This is great, thanks Kingsif (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, I got the scans. Where should I send them? Danilmay (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I have an email link, I think if you go to my profile there should be an option to email in the tool list. Kingsif (talk) 10:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, I sent you the scans. Check your email. Danilmay (talk) 12:36, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I will, I'll review them, then get into the other criteria (prose and focus, should be fairly quick) - thank you for going to the trouble. Kingsif (talk) 19:57, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, a friendly reminder that your review here is awaiting your attention. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
I've made it through the sources. Kingsif (talk) 20:50, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 On hold Few last comments. Kingsif (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Kingsif: I'm not sure where Danilmay has been for the last few weeks, so I've gone ahead and hopefully addressed your remaining comments. Cheers. Grk1011 (talk) 13:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Since you've also pinged Danilmay, I'll give them a day or two to respond in case they object to changes, before passing. Kingsif (talk) 00:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif, sorry for not answering for a long time. I don't mind the changes and therefore the article can pass. Danilmay (talk) 12:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)