Talk:Melodifestivalen 2022

Renaming Semi-finals 1-4 to "Heats"

With the introduction of the 5th semi to replace the second chance round, the Swedes themselves call the fifth show "Semifinalen" = "Semi-final", while the other 4 have always been called "Deltävling" which is a different word which doesn't translate to "semi-final". So, since in Swedish the first four shows are still being distinguished from the fifth, I suggest we do the same here with "Heat" being used for semis 1-4 and "Semi-final" for the fifth show. What do you think? —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 21:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Mmh, you are right, we should either think of two separate terms or place the Swedish ones in parentheses. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 22:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh wait, you were suggesting “Heats”. Makes sense to me. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 22:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: Indeed, also the "Heat" translation was the result of a Twitter consensus from last year held by the official Mello account so makes sense to use that —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 23:03, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that’s interesting! Then we should definitely go for “heat”. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 23:21, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I'd also change that for all the previous Melfests that had Deltävling shows then, for consistency. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 00:51, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I would also agree that this makes logical sense, and would support the retroactive renaming of Melodifestivalen semi-finals to heats where "deltävling" was used (which I believe goes back to 2002). Therefore 2002 to 2021 there would be Heats and Second Chance, and 2022 would have Heats and Semi-final. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 09:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Also support heats as it seems more accurate for Deltävling given the above evidence. Grk1011 (talk) 18:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

As it seems to be a consensus with no opposition, proceeding to make the changes from Melodifestivalen 2002 onwards —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 17:05, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Who won the First Heat?

I strongly disagree with listing Cornelia and Robin as undetermined joint winners. Prima facie Cornelia won. The second round of voting can’t supplant her as she wasn’t in it. Please do not revert without discussion here EuroAgurbash (talk) 11:18, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I haven’t watched the show, but from what I can see here she most definitely came first. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

The official source doesn't make it clear like every year. It should remain "1/2" for all heats (like every year) until the detailed results are provided after the final. Unless theres's an official statement, we can't just say she's first for various reasons (including that Robin might have got more votes thus winning overall). Also, @EuroAgurbash: I think you shouldn't have reverted the "1/2" as it's the most safe option until we reach a decision here and it's also unsourced currently and I'll have to place a {{Citation needed}}. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 17:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

The song qualifying first is the one with the most votes. Then the voting starts again, and then the second finalist and two ”second chance” winners are revealed. BabbaQ (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

SVT doesn't say that in the results. Is there an official source? Robin might have also gotten more points overall and wouldn't make sense to be 2nd in that case. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 17:41, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Why would they pick the song in second place? It makes no sense. But I see your point about a source though. BabbaQ (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

In the first round, yes the song picked is the first one. But overall the one that is picked second might have gathered more votes (due to the extra voting time). In that case, unless stated explicitly otherwise in the detailed results that will be published by SVT after the final, we should write as first the song with the most votes overall. So, until we get the detailed results it's better to have it as "1/2" to be on the safe side and to not assume anything —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 14:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Right now, it’s showing LIAMOO as “first - citation needed”. Utterly ridiculous - he is the only one who has qualified. EuroAgurbash (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

This is insane. Is no one else reading this? EuroAgurbash (talk) 20:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Post an official source, saying who's first overall and who's second overall. I can show you two (1, 2) that word it in a way that implies Liamoo hasn't necessarily won the whole heat and John hasn't necessarily come second. Oh and given you're contributing for 11 years, you should've known that in Wikipedia we only add sourced stuff and not what we think seems correct. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 21:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I separated the two voting rounds completely, with its own "Place" column each so that based on the available information we don't have to write "1/2" somewhere. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 22:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

The source is WATCHING THE SHOW. And I’ve been contributing for nearly 20 years. EuroAgurbash (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

You better calm down because the all-caps say otherwise and no, <ref>I watched the show and that's my source</ref> isn't a valid reference. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 23:23, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Collapsible tables

@Dimsar01: Regarding your revert back to collapsible tables, I do not believe that the cited exception you listed is valid in this case, as the breakdown by each age group for each heat is not included in the article beyond these tables, and therefore collapsing the tables by default could mean that this information is unavailable for some readers. Per the explanation under WP:DONTHIDE, "collapsed or auto-collapsing cells or sections may be used with tables if they simply repeat information covered in the main text", which is not fulfilled here. As including the full breakdown for each age group in each heat would be cumbersome, a data table is clearly the best option, but ones that are not collapsible by default. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

The exception also says "(or are purely supplementary, e.g., several past years of statistics in collapsed tables for comparison with a table of uncollapsed current stats)" and my point stands on the fact the mobile website does not hide the tables when are collapsed by default and it doesn't use JavaScript, as I turned it off in iOS Safari and the collapsed tables continued to be uncollapsed in the mobile site. As per MOS:PRECOLLAPSE, I also tested disabling both CSS and JS on the desktop version and the collapsed tables still show (reference screenshot on external hosting website). So what is the point of creating a bad UI, since yes, it looks bad when all are uncollapsed, for capable web clients (which are the majority) when nobody is affected even if their browser can only render HTML? —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 17:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure I would class the full breakdown of the votes by age group as "supplemental" though, since it's an integral part of the voting system for Melodifestivalen. And yes, while the majority of users will be able to see it even with autocollapse enabled, but even with all the workarounds you've mentioned above there will still be some users that won't be able to view this information. I'm just trying to point out a Wikipedia-wide guidance on this matter, and sure maybe logically it makes more sense to collapse these on load, but I guess the site should work for everyone, not just the large majority who would be able to toggle it on? Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)