Jump to content

Talk:2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony

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

Example article

[edit]

See 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony, which is considered a good article, for an example. --Another Believer (Talk) 22:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

>> Sochi Olympics kick off amid safety threat >> IOC expects Putin to stick to the script, unlike Bush?>> Russia's Olympic wall of security surrounds Sochi>> Hijacker on flight bound for Turkey yells 'bomb,' makes failed attempt to divert plane to SochiLihaas (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

To do

[edit]
  1. Review the ceremony with prose in teh relevant section
  2. Finish flag bearer list
  3. Finish guest list
  4. Names of Olympic flag bearers (8). Including Valentina Tereshkova.

(Lihaas (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]


Production

[edit]

According to the CBC (only way Americans can watch this live, pirate satellite broadcasts), the Canadian company Show Canada was deeply involved in the production of this opening ceremony, and that for 2012 London. http://www.show-canada.com/ may provide information for writing up the production information on both ceremonies, and provide viable search terms for net searches. -- 70.50.148.248 (talk) 19:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I just watched it online on the BBC, but then again im not in the USA. (or UK)(Lihaas (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Preparation

[edit]

In regards to the empty section for preparation, it doesn't seem to have any content that would be different from the ceremony. Perhaps its being added cause there's a section of this on the past pages. But we don't have to repeat it for the sake of it. If there is content, then we can fill it. I removed it per this(Lihaas (talk) 19:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Surely many preparations took place in order for the ceremony to occur. Rehearsals, design plans, etc. See the 2012 article for example. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just said we don't need to see the other article to add an empty section per WP:OSE. But if there is stuff with sources, then add it. No probs with that.
It seems now that some sourced info has appeared here.(Lihaas (talk) 16:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Attendees

[edit]

Why are country names and titles removed from the dignitaries section? Not all flags are generally well-known and the dignitaries included both presidents and prime ministers; a meaningful distinction. Iselilja (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About the official list, AP is citing. That list is clearly wrong. They say for instance that Norway's prime minister Erna Solberg and Norway's king Harald would be there. Both of them will attend the Olympics, but have not arrived yet and did not attend the opening ceremony. I suspect it's similar with several of the others; for instance the Swedish king. Iselilja (talk) 01:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up: According to this source from RiaNovosti, the Swedish king and queen will be in Sochi 14-16 February. The Danish Crown Prince however is in Sochi 4-8 February, so he probably attended the opening ceremony. The Norwegian royals will be in Sochi 17-22 February. It was the Norwegian Minister of Sport who represented Norway at the opening ceremony. So, the AP list had 3 of 4 wrong of those I have managed to check. Iselilja (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Titles were removed to save space as the list overwhelms the article... Really I don't see a need to list all the dignitaries. It seems like trivia and/or undue weight to me. 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony has no such list and it is a recognized GA. Apparently, it is also fraught with errors - most the sources used say "is ,expected to attend" and such. Do you object to removing the list entirely? --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about it, I wonder if the list of dignitary attendees (and non-attendees) should be moved to the general page on the Olympics or another suitable page; I don't know about the attendees but I do know that most of the non-attendees decided to not attend the Games in general, not just the opening ceremony. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Iselilja seems to be going on conjecture. "probably attended" and in the edit summaries "thre three I know are wrong" is not credible enough for WP. If an RS source states it, that trumps editorial judgement.Lihaas (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT section

[edit]

this is really pushing a POV with speculation. Not to mention media sensationalism. Its on the concerns article which is in turn on the template on this page.

As for "The ceremonies paid tribute to gay Russian artists" there is no source that this was specifically because of their sexual orientation. That is speculative.(Lihaas (talk) 14:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

We report what the reliable sources state, not what we wish they said. And no one suggested they were included because of being gay, just that this was a bit ironic given the ban on "gay propaganda." Sportfan5000 (talk) 15:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your insertion here that no one said such is that fact, you are then adding SYNTHESIS to assert it as ironic. The RS sources need to draw the link, not the WP editor. That becomes Wp:SYNTHESIS and self-reporting.
Likewise, the duo's past antics and its "ironic" element here is for their WP page and synthesis on the Olympic page, respectively.
Holding the historic "controversy" of the gay law, etc is already mentioned in the controversies page that is available from the template (it is not censored). this is specifically about the opening ceremony itself. Its POV--pushing to reinsert it everywhere.
Also per Wp:BRD, your BOLD addition once reverted needs a consensual discussion to reinsert it, not claims of censorship.Lihaas (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you read the source … you'll note they make the connection so is not synthesis at all. I'll look for more sources so the connection is blindingly clear to all. The sources are connecting the gay culture, the antics, the Olympic controversy over banning gay propaganda, and the ironic inclusion in the Olympic ceremonies. Sportfan5000 (talk) 16:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Lihaas - devoting a section to speculation over someone's wording and personal observations of supposed irony is inappropriate and clearly pushing a POV. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The section has already been merged, so that concern has been addressed. I have no issue with merging. Sportfan5000 (talk) 16:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not readd in edit warring till consensuys is formed. Right now a majority think it is UNDUE. You have to generate consensus for it first. (Lihaas (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]
The stated concern was that the information was somehow not NPOV, and synthesis was being used. Those claims were refuted/addressed and other sources supporting the material added. Sportfan5000 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
t.A.T.u. wasn't really part of the opening ceremony (played before it). Commentary on them is really not needed. A sentence or two (in total) about gay issues in article seems to be the appropriate level, so I left the other two sentences. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The commentary is needed specific to t.A.T.u., per the sources, especially since the two items have been completely split. Sportfan5000 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We need a reception section. Also your insistent use of "anti-gay" makes even less sense here given that said group portrays themselves as lesbian, not gay. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your complete scrubbing of any mention of these facts has rendered the article as lacking a NPOV, per the sources you removed. And anti-gay is correct as lesbians are gay. Sportfan5000 (talk) 19:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We are not scrubbing them because its about LGBT. We're scrubbing it from there because its original research (and possibly POV pushing), and that is never allowed on Wikipedia. If you want to discuss the critics noticing this, add it to an overall reception section (which this article still needs, by the way). And also, L and G in LGBT stand for "Lesbian" and "Gay", lumping them both under "gay" is probably just as offensive as using "homosexual" in my opinion. That's why I'm at least using "LGBT" instead. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is a bit disingenuous, lesbians have long been covered as just under the umbrella gay from the very beginning, reliable sources use it interchangeably and the vast majority of sources concerning the ban on propaganda have termed it as being anti-gay, and against "gay propaganda," not LGBT. In some instances these terms are interchangeable but not always. The assertion that this is in any way original research is off base. It's all based on what the reliable sources have stated. If you hadn't deleted it all, you could read them yourself. Sportfan5000 (talk) 20:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sportfan, irregardless of what you think is right you have now re-added the material four or five times and three separate editors have removed it. You have already violated WP:3RR at are in serious danger of being blocked. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been altered each time, so I wasn't aware they were all considered the same reversions. And it was ViperSnake151 who removed everything even after others conceded that at least some of the content was valid. Sportfan5000 (talk) 20:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From WP:3RR: "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert." You re-added the same text (almost word for word identical) at least 4 times all the while knowing that a discussion about the text was in progress, with multiple people disagreeing with you. That is pretty blatant edit warring. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware of that at the time, and I made adjustments almost every time to allow for what was stated as the issue. Sportfan5000 (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it that time because, in an article like this, views expressed should remain separate from discussion of the work itself. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This was the first time that idea had been expressed concerning this content, and I have no problem with that. Of course, you could have just moved it into the separate section instead of deleting it. Sportfan5000 (talk) 20:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We have this mentioned in the concerns page where it is appropriate. The issue at the opening ceremony is moot as there was nothing here itself. Just references to past controversies of the event as a whole. This is synthesis and POV pushing and all 3 editors here are expressing such doubt.Lihaas (talk) 13:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually this content is not on that page as it's not appropriate there as it concerns …the opening ceremonies. The sources were specific to the opening ceremonies, are claims it was synthesis are false. A NPOV article would of course cover the notable criticism. The three editors here have expressed different opinions, so please don't pretend you speak for others. I will find more sources to support the content to allay your stated concerns. Sportfan5000 (talk) 13:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What was specific to the opening ceremony then? There is nothing pertaining to this sepcfic evvent that was controversial in regards to LGBT issues. The content you have added refers to the past controversy, and the "ironic" elemnt is your synthesis.
Per above, Thaddeus B says "I agree with Lihaas..."; ViperSnake151 says "its original research (and possibly POV pushing)". Tthats what each is concerned about.vLihaas (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you read the sources they discuss the irony, synthesis is "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." I never did that. I reported what the sources talked about in relation to the opening ceremonies. The sources refute all your claims. And there is no problem finding more. Sportfan5000 (talk) 14:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Wp:ONUS is on you to assert the relevance to this event. If you care to convince its utlity then cite, and even quote here on the talk page, the part you deem worthy of addition.Lihaas (talk) 14:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Your standards for others to follow is noted. Sportfan5000 (talk) 14:43, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Table

[edit]

Is there a way to make the letter table right-aligned and have text wrap around it? The current display creates too much white space. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 17:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because of its size, the table takes up a large portion of the article and prevents other images from being added. Hopefully this will change as the sections are further developed. It would be nice to be able to include at least a couple more images from the ceremony. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the text size could be reduced to 90%? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a wikitable expert, but my thought late last night was that it could be done in multiple columns to shorten the table. Jcbarr (talk) 01:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Do you think the Ы Association link could include a Pun for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_(novel)? Agrajag22 (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Music

[edit]

I'm pretty sure I heard Polovtsian Dances during the opening ceremony, not once. Can someone confirm this so it can be added to the article? --IJK_Principle (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh it's there already under "Fly away on the wings of the wind", deeply sorry. --IJK_Principle (talk) 21:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns on section

[edit]

Other than the mere list (and tag), there are sourcing concerns here. Including such changes as [1][2][3](Lihaas (talk) 13:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Where is the Doga's waltz from 'My Sweet and Tender Beast' film (but not in a good arrangement) in a scene in Tolstoy's War and Peace of Natasha's first Ball? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.85.142.226 (talk) 07:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irina Skvortsova

[edit]

According to the Kremlin's website (http://eng.kremlin.ru/photo/2338 - third picture), the woman standing next to Putin was Irina Skvortsova, a bobsledder who was seriously injured in a training accident. See here for more info: http://en.ria.ru/russia/20100330/158360884.html

I came to this article looking for her name, so I thought I should leave a note here. Cloudlet (talk) 10:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly useful. Feel free to be Wp:bold(Lihaas (talk) 14:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]
I would've done that, but I saw no place to put her name. The "Dignitaries in attendance" section, of course, lists only politicians and royals, and she's neither. Cloudlet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dignitaries in attendance

[edit]

Can we divide this into 2-3 columns? I dont know how to do it. But it would clean up the page into shorter scrolling.(Lihaas (talk) 20:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

It is currently set to auto pick the # of columns based on browser width. (Shows as two columns for me.) Not all browsers support multiple columns though. See Help:Columns. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chronological order

[edit]

Why has the Olympic anthem been put in the same section as the Russian anthem giving the impression that both anthems have been sung in the same segment of the ceremony. Why not follow the chronological order of the ceremony, when the Olympic anthem was sung during the raising of the flag ??? 90.47.219.199 (talk) 20:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion - article fixed. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russian History

[edit]
"...famous Russians, such as Peter Tchaikovsky (1840–1893)..."

The composer Tchaikovsky's first name is customarily rendered as Pyotr in English. Dick Kimball (talk) 13:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2014

[edit]

Please check here http://www.sochi2014.com/en/news-sochi-2014-organizing-committee-presents-olympic-winter-games-opening-ceremony-team. In section Preparations giving all the credits for the Opening ceremony to Konstantin Ernst is factually incorrect. As stated above, he was the head of the group and the Director of the Opening ceremony was Russian TV director Andrei Boltenko, who directed Eurovision Show from Russia, opening of the Bolshoi Theater, Vancouver-to-Sochi Transfer and the Sochi Opening ceremony. This is acknowledged also by Daniel Ezralow here http://www.thewrap.com/olympics-2014-choreographer-opening-ceremony, note his quote: "[Daniel] said he was approached by opening ceremony director Andrei Boltenko to design the section of the ceremony that, like in other Olympics, focuses on the history and culture of the host country."

Russkibass (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: This page is no longer protected. Subject to consensus, you should be able to edit it yourself. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 00:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Abkhazia and South Ossetia

[edit]

I disagree with including the leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the dignitaries list; they are the leaders of two almost-totally unrecognized states(except for Russia and other unrecognized states). It is not un-neutral to limit the list of dignitaries to those of generally recognized states. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to ‎Soffredo's edit summary "If there hasn't been any comments, then a final decision hasn't been made. These unrecognized states shouldn't be treated any lesser than another state"; Why? They are not recognized states except in their own minds; essentially non-entities. Unrecognized states should not be on the same level as actual states and their "dignitaries" shouldn't be either. They are not heads of state or heads of government if their states are unrecognized. I could live with a separate section for them, but they should not be listed with actual heads of state and government.

These two unrecognized states also did not have teams at the Olympics to support by being there(as the IOC, again, does not recognize them). 331dot (talk) 10:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's a list of dignitaries in attendance. Abkhazia Alexander Ankvab and South Ossetia Leonid Tibilov attended. Why wouldn't they be included? [Soffredo] Journeyman 2 13:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't "dignitaries"; they represent no recognized state. Both Abkhazia and South Ossetia are still considered by the vast majority of the international community to be part of Georgia and illegally occupied by Russia. Legally, Ankvab and Tibilov are no different than any other attendee of the ceremony as their governments are not recognized. As I said above, I could live with listing them under a different heading to be determined, but they should not be listed as heads of state or government as they are not considered that by virtually the entire international community. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They are on the list of current heads of state and government. They were invited to Russia, a state the recognizes them. To Russia, the host, they're not any other attendee of the ceremony. [Soffredo] Journeyman 2 22:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are listed there- under the "limited recognition" section. I would suggest doing something similar here. They are not recognized by 95% of the world, if the Olympics were anywhere else they would not have been invited as any sort of dignitary. They also have no Olympic team to support as the IOC does not recognize them. 331dot (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored my edit, as this page should not treat these disputed territories any different than the List of sovereign states and the list of heads of state page, which lists them as from disputed areas. The PRC, Armenia, and DPRK are recognized by a majority of nations and are UN members despite being disputed; when Abkhazia and South Ossetia are either recognized by a majority of nations or are UN members, I would change it myself. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Extended content
Main page: User talk:Soffredo § Abk and SO

Abk and SO

They are not heads of any recognized state. This is a fact, and we should not pretend that they are. Four countries recognizing a disputed territory doesn't make it a state. They are not UN members and not recognized by a majority of countries, whom still consider the territories a part of Georgia and illegally occupied by Russia. They also are not IOC members and had no Olympic team. Russia occupying foreign territory and then recognizing it as a state should not merit calling the territory a state. It would be no different than if the leader of Dontesk was invited to the Olympics. Frankly, I don't think they should be mentioned at all as the leaders of illegitimate states; I think listing them as leaders of disputed states is a reasonable compromise. 331dot (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a RfC for further comment by others. 331dot (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Four countries recognizing a disputed territory doesn't make it a state.
Abkhazia has been considered a de facto state before it was recognized by any UN member in 2008. Recognition is not important in this case.
They are not UN members and not recognized by a majority of countries, whom still consider the territories a part of Georgia and illegally occupied by Russia.
You don't need to be a UN member to be a sovereign state, nor do you need to be recognized by a majority of countries. The  Cook Islands and  Niue are not UN members and are widely recognized.  Taiwan is a State that isn't recognized by a majority of countries.
They also are not IOC members and had no Olympic team.
You don't need to have an Olympic team to be a State. See  South Sudan and  Vatican City.
Russia occupying foreign territory and then recognizing it as a state should not merit calling the territory a state.
That is WP:POV which isn't allowed.
It would be no different than if the leader of Dontesk was invited to the Olympics.
The difference would be that the  Donetsk People's Republic isn't recognized by Russia (unlike Abkhazia and South Ossetia) so this event would be very unlikely.
I don't see why we should separate these heads of disputed states on a page about the Olympics. Alexander Ankvab and Leonid Tibilov were invited as heads of states. You don't see a note for whenever someone visits from the  Sahrawi Republic, now do you? [Soffredo] Yeoman 2 20:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should the leaders of Abkhazia and South Ossetia who attended the ceremony be listed as heads of government given that their governments are not generally recognized? 331dot (talk) 18:54, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I had edited the page to list their leaders in a separate section but was reverted. 331dot (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, they shouldn't. They were invited as Heads of States. Russia recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. When dignitaries of the SADR or the ROC are invited, they aren't given a special note. [Soffredo] Yeoman 2 21:02, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What they were invited as is completely irrelevant(if Russia invites the Governor of Texas as a head of state, does that mean Texas is a nation?); they are not generally recognized heads of state. The only reason they were even invited as that is because of an illegal Russian occupation; the international community overwhelmingly does not recognize that act, and neither does the IOC. We shouldn't claim they are something they are not. What they are is the leaders of disputed territories. The ROC is a poor example, as the ROC is not considered a nation by the IOC(and is not referred to as the ROC at the Games), is not a UN member, and is not universally recognized. These two people are not recognized heads of state. This is a fact. 331dot (talk) 22:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They get a special note on the List of sovereign states(being listed under 'other states') and on List of current heads of state(ditto) so I don't see why they should be treated differently here. 331dot (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What they were invited as is completely irrelevant(if Russia invites the Governor of Texas as a head of state, does that mean Texas is a nation?)
In the scenario that the Independent State of Texas was recognized by Russia, a UN member, it'd be included in the List of sovereign states.
The only reason they were even invited as that is because of an illegal Russian occupation
Once again, WP:POV.
the international community overwhelmingly does not recognize that act, and neither does the IOC.
You don't necessarily need to be internationally recognized to be a de facto state. Also, the IOC is irrelevant as it isn't related to the politics of world. (Puerto Rico has an Olympic team and it isn't a State!)
The ROC is a poor example, as the ROC is not considered a nation by the IOC(and is not referred to as the ROC at the Games), is not a UN member, and is not universally recognized.
What does recognition from the IOC or the UN (which isn't possible) have to do with the ROC having a Head of State or not?
These two people are not recognized heads of state. This is a fact.
Not recognized by all as heads of states, but that doesn't mean they aren't. De facto relates to what is a fact, and these people were presidents of de facto States.
I've now included the message you left on my talk page before, since it seems relevant to the discussion. [Soffredo] Yeoman 2 19:48, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, WP:POV
This is not a POV issue; there are Russian troops within the generally recognized borders of Georgia without the permission of the government of Georgia or an international body. That is a fact, not a POV issue.
You don't necessarily need to be internationally recognized to be a de facto state. Also, the IOC is irrelevant as it isn't related to the politics of world. (Puerto Rico has an Olympic team and it isn't a State!)
This article does not make references to de facto heads of state; it makes reference to heads of state, without a qualifier. The IOC is relevant because the Olympics must be conducted in a manner dictated by them.
What does recognition from the IOC or the UN (which isn't possible) have to do with the ROC having a Head of State or not?
Because the head of state of Taiwan/ROC cannot attend the Olympics as a head of state due to IOC rules and agreements with the PRC, regardless of how he/she is invited. And by "UN" I meant the states who vote to decide that at the UN.
Not recognized by all as heads of states, but that doesn't mean they aren't. De facto relates to what is a fact, and these people were presidents of de facto States.
And all I want to do is point that out, as it is on other pages like the List of sovereign states. Not doing so is a great disservice to readers who will believe that they are generally recognized nations when they are not. They are not recognized by the overwhelming majority of the world. What is de jure matters just as much as what is de facto. If you object to the term "disputed territories" or "states" I'm open to other language. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that if we were to separate them, we would be treater their positions as lesser. During this ceremony, they were invited as heads of states just as anyone else. They were not invited under the inferior title of a "head of a disputed territory". But, as a compromise, maybe a note (similar to Kosovo-note) after their names could be put in place. There's no need to put them in a separate section. But for now, I feel that it's fine if we can just keep them where they are. [Soffredo] Yeoman 2 21:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I could accept that as a last resort, but I don't think that's the best choice. They are lesser. An unrecognized state is lesser than a recognized one. In the case of Kosovo, it is recognized by a majority of other states (108) while these two states are recognized by Russia and Venezuela, and in the case of Russia, there would be no state to recognize without Russian troops within the generally recognized borders of Georgia. What they are invited as is irrelevant. 331dot (talk) 21:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved - Attendees from Abkhazia and South Ossetia will be listed in a separate section for "leaders of disputed territories". [Soffredo] Yeoman 2 23:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

t.A.T.u.

[edit]

Some lines in the article are complete nonsense, there are sources, but they are totally wrong and contradicting to common sense. Some are disputable.

1. Nikolai Gogol. There is a speculation that he was gay, however some researchers say there is not enough evidence to assert this. More on this issue here

2. Sergei Eisenstein. He himself insisted he was neither heterosexual nor homosexual, he had no sexual intention towards people rather had "intellectual bisexuality" (see this article)

3. Their name in Russian is slang for girl-on-girl love, which is also likely to be considered illegal.

The name is not a slang word but just a game of words on tatoo and that (girl has intention towards) the other (girl). The word has no metaphoric sense, not to speak of illegal one.

4. t.A.T.u are known to have marched in support of gay pride, gay pride events have been banned from the country for 100 years. This is just a piece of absurdity, as no one ever tried to hold gay pride events before 2000s. "gay pride events have been banned for more than 10 years" - that would correspond to the facts. VanHelsing.16 (talk) 07:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is not with what we are reporting but what the sources have stated. Gogol's sexuality has been written about for many decades, especially an entire book on the subject in the mid-1970s. As for Eisenstein, his sexuality has also been covered to the satisfaction, of apparently many - "Eisenstein's personal life was also chaotic. He married twice in response to political pressure, but his marriages were never consummated. His unexpurgated diaries, published as Immortal Memories, are filled with accounts of his infatuations with many young men, including his assistant, Grigori Alexandrov. Often his infatuations (as in the case of Alexandrov) were with young heterosexual men, whom he would educate and assist in their careers. His drawings, exhibited during the centenary of his birth, include many illustrations of homosexual activity." Do I expect anything in Russian Wikipedia to even mention this, of course not, but a good biography would, and some do. As for the t.A.T.u. name, we can change what we report of we have sources to do so, the ban on gay pride parades for 100 years, is a recent law, also covered in the sources. And i think there have been efforts to hold gay pride events longer than 10 years ago but it's a moot point as that's not what is even being reported on. Sportfan5000 (talk) 15:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 16:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. 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:

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) 15:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2014 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. 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:

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) 01:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attendees

[edit]

Antonio Costa became prime minister of Portugal in 2015. It is impossible that he attended the 2014 opening ceremony in his role as prime minister. 178.27.129.118 (talk) 00:43, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2014_Winter_Olympics_opening_ceremony&oldid=1196673692"