User talk:Jochem van Hees

Feel free to leave me a comment. That is an order. You must feel free.

A belated welcome!

The welcome may be belated, but the cookies are still warm!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, JochemvanHees. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Revision of the Euronews Radio info

Hi, Why did you revert my changes about the Euronews Radio? The information is not correct: the radio service has not been functional for at least half a year. So please put it back. Best, HuhuLesny (talk) 11:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello! The information in that section is correct; it simply states that Euronews Radio was launched in 2012 (which is true). I reverted your revision because I believed it falls under original research. Checking whether or not something works counts as research, meaning that you have to cite a published source confirming it. However, I later noticed that many more parts of the article are unsourced, but I don't have the time right now to clean up the entire article. ―JochemvanHees (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Eurovision 2021 semi final map

I don't know how to edit svg maps, but 2020 map shouldn't be here now because Armenia is out. Armenia should have been turned into gray and then it should have been a new file. But as I don't know how to edit svg maps, I asked user Avis28 who did a 2020 one, to do for 2021 as well. 009988aaabbbccc (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2021 (CEST)

Ah good call to ask someone to do it. I personally think a map is better than no map, as it's not that terribly wrong or something. But if it's getting fixed then that's good. ―JochemvanHees (talk) 20:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I made a new version of the map. It needs to be updated in other languages as well --Avis28 (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Galasy ZMesta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Belarusian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Embers (James Newman song) has been accepted

Embers (James Newman song), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Side events locations info placing - ESC21

Well since that paragraph also mentions the abolition/modification of other side events due to the pandemic, I think it should be at the close of the "impact of the pandemic" section instead? Also including that at the top of the 'Locations' section right away would confuse casuals.--Pdhadam (talk) 11:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I guess it does kinda fit in both, but I think that especially the info about the turquoise carpet should be in the location section. That's also where it is in articles about previous editions. Maybe we could move it to the bottom of the location section though, under an "Other sites" header. The "Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic" section falls under the "Production" section, so my logic was that it only contains things relevant to the production of the contest. Although maybe we could also mention in short that due to COVID-19 the other side events are not going ahead. ―JochemvanHees (talk) 12:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Mz7 (talk) 00:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

List of World Series champions

Regarding this reversion of vandalism, I can tell you what it's about. Back in 1961, when Roger Maris was chasing Babe Ruth's single-season home run record, Ford Frick, the Commissioner of Baseball and biased towards Ruth, said that he might have two different lines in the record book, as Ruth hit 60 home runs in a 154 game season while Maris was playing in a 162 game season. After Maris broke the record, the powers that be added an asterisk after the record with a footnote denoting the season length. The asterisk has since been used by fans as a way to delegitimize certain records, like Barry Bonds' career home run record, or teams that cheated like the 2017 Astros. It's vandalism, and I thank you for reverting it. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Having fun at the audience?

How's Eurovision? I saw you wrote sometime ago at some edit you attend, and quite obvious with you being so devoted and fan and with places in Netherlands relatively close and easily reachable. The crowed, although relatively small, seems and sounds extremely enthusiastic and loud. Are you enjoying yourself? :) אומנות (talk) 06:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, totally! I was at the first-semi final and I will be at the final tomorrow. It is incredible to be there, with so many fellow Eurofans around it's an amazing atmosphere. And the show is an enormous spectacle; it's really impossible not to cheer and sing along. The only disadvantage is that afterwards I have a lot of stuff to catch up on, including Eurovision content that I missed like the press conferences, and also study-related stuff. So that's why I have a lot less time left for wiki editing (which is why my reply is so late, sorry!) ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm very happy for you, having amazing experiences even. I also thought about how you doing there, and wanted to wish you a good time, as I saw your vast dedicated contributions and kind communication the past months - including until few days ago when I still looked at some Eurovision articles. So despite you being more busy now, how you still dedicate time for Wikipedia. :)

I worked during 2019 Eurovision and prioritized to even watch the contest from home also for comfort reasons, and only attended 2 unofficial parties at night during the week, but still those where amazing in themselves as well with famous Eurovision winners. Also got the chance to be on an amazing Eurovision-and general music performances Mediterranean cruise including performances from Eurovision winners and other participants on the ship.

Still, hope one day to attend Eurovision too, with a good viewing and a chair (don't have capability to stand for hours). Sorry you miss watching the press conferences at home, although you can try going with a journalist or get a journalist-tag (many fans manage to get them and enter the press conference themselves, as well people considered journalists for writing blogs and on fansites) so you may be even present at the conference once the contest finishes, as I assume it's right next-door or close nearby the contest's hall. The show does look amazing with the pyrotechnics, especially Greece's staging impressed me. And a bunch of songs in diverse genres are surprisingly very much to my taste, with strong energetic performances.

To share bit further, every edition after 1995 (the highest quality edition in my opinion) has only few songs I really like, with emotional and high notes range and deep lyrics. North Macedonia and Denmark 2021 with their more yesteryear styles (high notes emphasized ballad and Schlager), didn't make it as less in fashion on the music scene nowadays which is a shame for my taste, though other songs like Greece which fuse 1980s Dance in a fresh way, made the final. So there are a bunch of other good songs at the final too and very energetic performances, more than in 2019 and the cancelled 2020. My favorite is Italy, as almost every year lately and many previous years, including 2020 where I firmly believe Italy would have won. So, I wish for Italy to win now and in general think it's about time. BTW you responded quickly although you're busy. Thank you for this, and in general for your kind communication and professional contributions the past months, why I also really wanted to wish you good time this week and wish you keep enjoy your awesome Wikipedia contribution, have the best time tonight. אומנות (talk) 08:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Deleting the Italian lyric's censorship incident

Why wouldn't you call this incident? Who says what an incident is? Is the fact it is a lower scale than another incident doesn't make it an incident? The definition of Incident, according to Cambridge English Dictionary is: "an event that is either unpleasant or unusual". It is unusual that words are being censored in the contest, and in other years' articles (such as 2005) it does mention such an even as incident.

Therefore, I believe it is a relevant information that needs to be mentioned on the Incidents section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danyzack02 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah this was a rather bold edit. My reasoning was that it isn't really one event, just something about the song (which should be on its own article). But I agree that it is unusual. (Also there doesn't seem to be an incidents section for the 2005 article?) ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

New article

What you think about it? Talk:Damiano David.--ParoleSonore (talk) 17:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't know, I am not familiar with the notability criteria for people, and I also don't know much about him in particular. Articles like these often start out as stubs with few sources so maybe it'll just take some time. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 18:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

UK Download chart on "Embers"

Per WP:CHARTMATH, we don't include component charts (that is, the statistics of one chart that make up another, bigger chart) in wikitables when the song charted on the main chart of a country. As "Embers" has now charted on the main UK Singles Chart (and downloads are included in a song's placement on that chart), we should now exclude the download chart—you might notice the download chart is not included in other tables where the main UK chart is (and if it is, an editor who doesn't know we shouldn't do this has snuck it in). Download sales really don't mean a lot in 2021 and are overwhelmingly dwarfed by streaming numbers, so number three or even number one on a download chart now isn't anything significant. Number one on a streaming chart is a bigger indication of a song's actual popularity. Also, we generally disregard alphabetical order when it comes to the main UK Singles entry being placed before UK Indie. Other articles have set the precedent for this, and other editors are apparently in agreement considering there's been little to no dissent on the matter. Thanks. Ss112 18:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Ah I didn't know that. Thanks for the explanation! ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Samira Efendi

Hi. Thanks for help with resolving the dispute regarding Efendi. But I think there is one more issue that needs addressing in Armenia–Azerbaijan relations in the Eurovision Song Contest. Popmatters writes that "she called Armenians “terrorists”". But another source writes that "the petition stated that Efendi has “openly attacked Armenians” by sharing taglines that called Armenians “terrorists”. The Change.org campaign has not listed a direct citation for the comments that Efendi allegedly made. [1] So the actual claim was that she shared taglines, but did not actually call Armenians terrorists. But then even that is questionable, because no evidence was provided. I checked the petition, and indeed, it actually claimed that she shared taglines, so it is bad journalism from Popmatters. What do you think is the best way to address this, because in present form the claim is actually slanderous? Grandmaster 16:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, PopMatters is a reliable source according to Wikipedia guidelines, and is cited across the site. I also don't find it bad journalism, it's just their interpretation of their source. But if you think that the current phrasing is wrong, and you can cite your "another source", then WP:FIXIT. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 23:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I rewrote the text to demonstrate that it was a claim made in the petition, and not an actual fact. Grandmaster 08:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)