Talk:Russia–Ukraine relations in the Eurovision Song Contest

Lead

I'd like to see a bit of back story in the lead that led to the current situation, with the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. -- AxG / ✉  19:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree with you AxG. The article is still in its early days of construction, so the lead will take time to evolve - I guess. Although, it would be helpful if the two editors who have expanded the main body, would have also summarised their content into the lead, seeing as that is what we're suppose to do. I've mopped up some big errors; including grammar and citation style. I don't think it is fair that I feel like I'm chasing around with the proverbial mop and bucket cleaning up after everyone - (just a bit of lighthearted banter in that statement). Wes Mouse ^Talk 20:56, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Maintaining neutral point of view

In respect to keeping WP:NPOV, this article at present is detailing the negative relations between the two nations. However, there have been positive relations between them as well, and I'm thinking perhaps we could maybe present these into the article. For example, the voting history between the two. Both have exchanged the top-3 points (9 times from Russia, 11 times from Ukraine) since 2003. Any suggestions on other scenarios in which both had good relations? Wes Mouse ^Talk 17:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I think in 2016 Lazarev, the Russian contestant, congratulated Jamala and said that was an excellent performance or smth. I will try to look for sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:53, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, Sergey Lazarev after the contest recorded a video in English, aimed at his fans, in which he congratulated Jamala and said that he is happy with the third place overall. (source 1) --Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ymblanter:, I hope you don't mind me fixing the source slightly. Using citeweb on talk pages ends up putting refs at the bottom, when there are never reference sections within talk pages. I've also handled your unsigned comment too. In response to the discovery, the video no longer works, and the YouTube account has been removed, so we have no video proof to back-up the source - so we are nonetheless any wiser as to whether the source is reliable or not. Wes Mouse ^Talk 19:04, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

• Do we know how reliable of a source that newsme.ua] are? If they are reliable, then we have a source to back-up the claim that Lazarev congratulated Jamala. Wes Mouse ^Talk 19:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

RIA Novosti is a Russian news agency, as soon as they are not talking about politics (and in this case they seem to merely transmit the message of the video) they are reliable. English-speaking media from Ukraine are typically fine (again, if they do not talk about politics). We can give both refs. Apologies for screwing up with the signature.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I suppose we could use both sources, as it adds more credibility and verifying to the positive side that we are writing about. Wes Mouse ^Talk 19:23, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Ukraine and Russia giving each other big points does not mean relations between them them are good. The reason for this are lots of ethnic russians living in Ukraine and vice verca. --Tohaomg (talk) 07:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Nobody has said the fact they give each other big points is because they have good relations, Tohaomg. The section (and is clearly stated in its prose) states despite the unstable situation between both countries, they have still given each other points over the years - and is clearly sourced and documented accordingly. Wes Wolf ^Talk 08:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Tolmachevy Sisters

Sorry @Wesley Mouse: as this is another case of bad relations rathter than good, but according to Russia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014, the Tolmachevy Sisters were booed in part due to Russia's annexation of Crimea, sourcing material from the BBC. I personally don't think it's notable enough, but I'm just throwing it out there. --Tuxipedia (talk) 23:52, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

It is not that notable, as the booing was only at Russia, and Ukraine had no involvement. Wes Mouse ^Talk 13:28, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

As I see, many editors here are from Russia, and using pro-Russian sources as reliable sources, whilst deleting sources I gave from our governmental websites showing Ukrainian point of view and existing laws. I strongly protest the idea of usage of Wikipedia for Russian lobby.

Deleted or unmentioned facts

Some of the facts I have no longer wish to fight for, search sources (especially Ukrainian) because of total neglect to situation and to Eurovision in general:

• Blacklist of cultural persons (actors, singers) made in 2015 and has nothing to do with Samoilova and consisted of Russian people who signed "letter of support" for Putin about Crimea annexation.
• Regulations about border crossing were not established yesterday specially for Samoilova, existed from 2015, applied to many politics. Ukraine announced this ban for such people far before the win in 2016 and for Samoilova this was pre-defined at that time.
• Russia assigned problematic contestant without any selections and they knew about border regulations for foreigners, they knew Samoilova had issues with Ukrainian laws.
• By Ukrainian officials this was estimated as provocation, this is not mentioned in article.
• Russia officially confirmed fact of Samoilova visit to Ukraine (Crimea).
• Samoilova during concert in Kerch (Crimea) expressed pro-russian position.
• Article states that Ukraine will be banned (in future?) by admin-insisted contribution from The Guardian while such formulationn is absent in official letter (Impact used instead which is not SAME as BAN). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Khimich (talk • contribs) 22:18, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
• Officials of EBU first announced a respect of local law in host country later for no reason changed point of view stating this is first time in history which is not so.
• Georgia was NOT admitted by Russia to Eurovision (Seems to be 2009?) but everybody tells that Ukraine did this AWFUL thing first in history.
• Article cites just point of view of Russian officials.

— Alex Khimich (talk) 19:58, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry to say, but you try to sell us propaganda which is not really based on reliable sources. In particular, Georgia indeed did not participate in 2009 because it withdrew. Our article, Georgia in the Eurovision Song Contest, details what happened, providing sources. I am not aware of any reliable source saying Georgia did not participate because the singer was banned from entry by the Russian authorities. You seem to be sitting within the Ukrainian information bubble, and your statements based on gossip are simply not true.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

You're so forgetful, let me remind you why Russia did not let the Georgia in contest. You seem to speak Russian. Okay, don't say I lie, this is Russian RS directly saying that the song was not OK according to Russian tastes as it happened with many Ukrainian songs. OMG we need a sea between our borders. :( — Alex Khimich (talk) 21:41, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

This is exactly what our article says: They tried to present a song which was not conform to the policies, were told by IBU to change the song, and decided to withdraw instead. I do not see how the article you cited supports your claim that they were denied entry by Russia. Actually, it does not.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

They were told so because Russia was against and EBU was playing someone's feedle in this case. Put in != Putin as Lasha tumbai != Russia goodbye. Catch the letter from Ukrainian INFORMATIONAL BUBBLE ;-) as you say and see how it states things. At least our media say whom they cite and what they cite. — Alex Khimich (talk) 22:09, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I have to stop the discussion, because you operate with your fantasies, and here we use policies. Claiming that smth is written in an article whereas this it is not written in the article is, well, a lie. You are lying indeed, very shamelessly.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, stop there, because you operate as russian lobbyist and nothing more, while I gave you many links. Thank you for conversation anyway, got some cons not to be repeated in future. — Alex Khimich (talk) 22:38, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Alex, no one objects to improving this page (please do), however your comments and edits were not very logical. You argue above that "Blacklist of cultural persons" was irrelevant. OK, that might be, but you actually expanded content about this blacklist in your edit and the meaning of your edit was not entirely clear. First of all, there was a List of individuals sanctioned during the Ukrainian crisis. She was not one of them. Then, there was a blacklist of banned Russian artists who "create threats to national security Ukraine" (see here or here; note that your links and refs do not support your statement). She was not one of them. If I understand correctly, she was denied visa simply as a person (not necessarily an artist) who visited Crimea through Russia. She was not included in any "blacklists". If that's the case (I am not completely sure), this could be clarified. My very best wishes (talk) 22:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

First of all let me thank you as for original author of this article, and thank you for feedback. Sorry for drawing your thing into politics. Unfortunately the formula Someone vs Somebody implies disputes, so, once upon a time you will come and see few parties chatting around it. Well, not to make you bored, saying with no prompt: I trust your point of view as I see you're fluent in Eurovision far beyond this issue (I analysed the history of article and saw intention of clarification but not intention of POV-pushing). I will gladly accept your final decision and unwatch article. About edits:

* The blacklist made in 2015 has no relation to participant, but since you mentioned it here I helped with sources and explanation of where it came from. I didn't want to remove it without discussion leaving it to decide for you.

* Yes, now you operate with correct facts she was denied visa simply as a person (not necessarily an artist) who visited Crimea through Russia. (We don't have visas with Russia). This regulation came in 2015 (note, when no Eurovision was planned) and banned entrance to dozens of people (mostly politicians supporting Russia).

* And what is the addition is the original letter from EBU (republished from oikotimes.com) but I cant find original publication which is not speaking about ban but about impact which is not same. Here I fight on verbatim formulation but not about sensation (what pro-Russian people want). — Alex Khimich (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

So, do they keep a predefined list of all people (much longer than here) who 'are going to be denied entry to Ukraine because they visited Crimea from Russia? That must be a very long list.My very best wishes (talk) 23:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Not full. Letter of support for annexation was submitted by 400+ people, as far as I know. — Alex Khimich (talk) 00:21, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

(Redacted) All the "points" listed in the opening comment are a load of propaganda-fuelling bullsh**t (pardon my language). The article is covering all facts, all aspects, all angles. The fact that the articles notes the blacklist of cultural persons (actors, singers) made in 2015, is rather simple (probably too simple for some minds to comprehend). We have to provide an explanation as to when the sanctions first began, in order to then explain how Samoylova became "BANNED". It is called providing a background on a topic to save the general reader having to Google search even more. It looks very much to me that Alex is disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, is failing to grasp that we MUST maintain a neutral point of view. If you don't like what is written, then go crawl back under the proverbial rock that you came out from. Wes Wolf ^Talk 23:26, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I came from Earth. If you want dialogue don't attack me. I didn't read further than a first line. — Alex Khimich (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Some of my comments were probably mild, but nothing hatred towards any person in their context. I respect the point of view about why a blacklist from 2015 is being mentioned in a section regarding the 2017 contest. But if that wasn't mentioned, and we just wrote that Samoylova was banned - people would want to know why. Which is why it is down to us to provide a background into how a ban was imposed, and annotate the blacklist (even if it is dating back to 2015). This article is by no means trying to portray across Pro-Russia or Pro-Ukraine. All the facts are written based on both sides of the argument. It is not our fault if there are more published sources that show favour to one country over the other - we can only write content based on sources. So if any argument needs to be fought out here, then take it out on the companies publishing the sources, don't take it out on us who are merely writing on what the sources have published. We are not the media police, and we cannot control what they publish. Wes Wolf ^Talk 13:31, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

It appears that the subject of sanctions in relation to Eurovision did appear already in 2015, long before this contest. Hence I made it as a separate section. My very best wishes (talk) 14:20, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: I'm not overly convinced that the new arrangement of that section is accurate in regards to article layout. Looking at it now, the article structure makes now sense. And most certainly not following the style on a similar article about Armenia and Azerbaijan relations. Perhaps we need to start off with a level-2 heading section on "Background" - that way we can annotate any information on the background relations between both countries (including the sanctions). Where you have re-positioned the content just doesn't make sense. Wes Wolf ^Talk 15:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, no objections. However, I think "2007 contest" section is not about Russia-Ukraine relations, but about strange/meaningless combination of words. It probably should be removed from the page? My very best wishes (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

So I removed the "2007 contest" for now, but it can be restored if someone can explain how this joke was related to Russia-Ukraine relations. This looks like simply a joke. My very best wishes (talk) 00:10, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: The section on 2007 contest should not be removed. It ties in with Russia-Ukraine. This article is not primarily about the sanctions situation. It is about any issue that happened between the two countries at Euroivision; and written in the same manner as its Armenia-Azerbaijan counterpart. So I am restoring the content. Wes Wolf ^Talk 09:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, that was obviously a joke, but it was apparently described in a few sources as a controversy. My very best wishes (talk) 03:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

1944 Updates

Hello! I recently updated the 2016 section to add more detail about why the Jamala song was so controversial and how she was vague and dismissive about the political connotations in some media coverage but also explicitly stated how it was relevant to the 2014 Crimean annexation. I also added some more in-depth responses and quotes from Russia officials regarding the win to make the level and passion of the response more clear to the reader.

Ukraine's 2005 entry

Someone more qualified than me could (should, really) write up about how Ukraine's 2005 entry Razom Nas Bahato influenced the situation and how it contributed to the Orange Revolution. OliviaEljest (talk) 17:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Timing of the EBU statement on Russian participation in ESC 2022

The article currently states that the EBU later stated that Russia as well as Ukraine will still be allowed to participate in the contest, but according to this source (in Dutch) it was published just before Ukraine was invaded ("Die verklaring werd gegeven vlak voordat Oekraïne werd binnengevallen."). A few other sources say it was "in the morning" but don't detail on the order of events. I also notice that Eurovoix reported on the response of the EBU and SVT before they reported on Suspline's statement. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 22:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

On the topic of timing of EBU statement, it appeared that it was indeed made before the invasion started, so I'll be removing "later" from the sentence. However, I still suggest keeping the Suspilne request up front and center (and not in the "reactions of other EBU members" section) since they're one of the two main parties of this conflict.--Pdhadam (talk) 04:54, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The Polish angle (2022)

There are some claims (not backed by any hard evidence, but repeated even by the Polish president!) that Ukrainian jury might have been influenced by Russian agents to cause dip in the Polish-Ukrainian relations. See here for wiki content, and this news story about Polish president comment ("“No one will ever be able to break our unity - neither hostile politicians, nor foreign agents on the jury at the Eurovision (song contest)!” Duda said, joking referring to the Ukrainian jury’s failure to award full points to the Polish entry at this years Eurovision, which Ukraine won."). This might be worth mentioning here too, with the focus on the Russian angle? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)