Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1973

Language of the Yugoslavian song

Someone wrote that the yugoslavian song was performed in Bosnian language, which is not correct. In 1973, the bosnian language did not exist, as the official languages of Yugoslavia were Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian, and Slovenian, and the song Gori Vatra was performed in Serbo-Croatian language, as it was officialy called in that time. By the way, Bosnian is the language of Bosniaks, and Zdravko Colic is Serb, thus even if we aply today's languge names, we couldn't say that he sang in Bosnian, but in Serbian language. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Language of the Swedish song

Talking about languages - There is a recording of the Swedish contribution on Youtube: and that song is definitely completely in English. The title is given there as "You're summer". Maybe there was a Swedish version of that song but as it seems it was not played at this contest. --88.73.136.200 (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1973/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sims2aholic8 (talk · contribs) 19:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: GRuban (talk · contribs) 16:40, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not done with the first pass until the Doing... is gone from the bottom. My comments will be in bullet points under each point of the Criteria. First note should probably be that Sims2aholic8 (talk · contribs) is now MDEire (talk · contribs), I was confused about that when I was looking to start this review... --GRuban (talk) 16:56, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Criteria:

1. Well-written:
   1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;[1] and
      • "The first entry to take advantage of this rule change [backing tracks] was that of the United Kingdom." Not clear; they were the only entry this year that used backing tracks? If so, we should say. They were among multiple entries this year? If so, in what sense were they "first", since their order seemed arbitrary - or was there enough time for other entries to see they were using backing tracks, see that it was useful, and change their performance to also use backing tracks? If so we should say that, and name the other entries.
        •  Not done --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
          • Apologies, I didn't respond to this point directly before, but I had made a rewrite to this part (see here). I do not have any other information on whether other acts this year used backing tracks as part of their performance, but Roxburgh is clear that the UK act was the first: "'Power To All Our Friends' had the distinction of being the first song ever in the contest to use backing tracks in addition to the live orchestra." mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 07:51, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
            • A shame, because it would be a useful clarification, but if the information just isn't available, then it just isn't available. I did a quick search and couldn't find it either, so will accept that. --GRuban (talk) 12:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
      • "Prior to its withdrawal, Malta was scheduled to perform in sixth position, between the entries from Norway and Monaco." Yes, but not really in the right place in the middle of the first paragraph in the Contest overview section. Move to a better place, or leave out entirely, where it exactly it would have performed is not really vital to the article. That it withdrew is important, but already said in Participants.
        •  Not done I see you moved it a bit, but it still sticks out in the paragraph about the clown drag act. Again, I'm not sure whether we even need it, who really cares in what position they would have been scheduled to perform? Is it somehow important? Did it influence why they dropped out? Did it influence either the Norway or Monaco performances? --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
          • I don't really understand your, in essence insistence, that information which is perfectly reasonable within the article should be removed. I think it is relevant, and would be interesting for some readers. I've moved this now to the "Production and format" section, so that it is directly following information on the running order draw itself. I hope this is a suitable compromise? mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 07:45, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
            • Because I think it's irrelevant; but you clearly feel strongly about it, and you are the expert, and it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb where you put it, so I'll take it.  Done --GRuban (talk) 12:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)
   2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[2]
      • Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:[3]
   1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;[4]
      • Yes
   2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
      • Yes
   3. it contains no original research; and
      • I went through some or even most of your sources, and even though you do have many online, I can't get to several important ones. Can you either make available or excerpt sources that back the following rather important and controversial bits:
        • "Malta ... considering the standard of songs that it had received to be of too low quality for the contest"
          • From Roxburgh: "[...] but Malta [...] pulled out very late in the day, citing that the songs submitted to the Maltese national selection programme were not up to Eurovision standard." (for information can be found about this at Malta in the Eurovision Song Contest 1973; most of the sources here are also behind paywall however)
          •  Done --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
        • "Audience members were instructed not to stand up during the contest itself at the risk of being shot by armed security within the venue, while Israeli entrant Ilanit was rumoured to have worn a bulletproof vest underneath her outfit during her performance"
          • From O'Connor: "[...] it has always been rumoured that [Ilanit] wore a bulletproof vest during her performance. In addition, the audience were warned not to stand during the show at the risk of being shot by security"
          • From Thorsson/Verhage (in the original Swedish): "Israel gjorde sin debut i tävlingen under stort säkerhetspådrag. Det hade bara gått ett halvår sedan massakern pa israeliska idrottsmän vid OS i Munchen, och det gick till och med rykten om att den israeliska sångerskan Ilanit skulle ha skottsäker väst på sig under klänningen."
          •  Done --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
        • one line in particular gaining much attention: "Oh your breasts are like swallows a-nestling" - also specify what was the attention, that it was weird, that it was funny, that it was sexual?
          • None of the sources included here, or that I can find at present, mention why it gained attention, because I think it's fairly obvious to most people that it's about people being skittish about the word "breasts". I don't really know what to do here, since expanding on exactly why would be in my opinion a WP:OR violation.
            • OK fine, but do excerpt a source or two. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

              • From O'Connor: "The Swedish entry came to the contest amid a storm of controversy. The focus of complaint was the lyrics of the song, 'You're Summer'. And the offending line was 'Your Breasts Are Like Swallows Nesting' [...]"

                From Richard et al. (in the original French): "La chanson suédoise fait quelques vagues, imaginez plutôt, voici un extrait des paroles: «tes seins sont comme deux nids douillets...» Le Concours est encore prude!" mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 15:27, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

                 Done. Maybe shorten "the lyrics of its entry, with one line in particular gaining much attention:" to just "the lyrics of its entry, including:", but not a requirement --GRuban (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

        • "Additional security was also posted at the Villa Louvigny, where the various commentators were situated during the contest, in particular to protect the UK delegation from potential attack by Irish republican paramilitaries."
          • From the Revue article (in the original German): "In der Villa Louvigny war man auch nervös geworden. Hier waren englischen Ansager, die einen Schlag der irländischen Organisation IRA befürchteten."
            • Not quite enough, it doesn't say that is where commentators were, or extra security was posted. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
              • Apologies, there was an extra part to this that I cut off: "So riegelte man denn auch den Stadtpark ab." I can work to find additional references for this point, however "englischen Ansager" would I believe support the former point about commentators ("Ansager", or "announcer", being another word for commentator in this context). mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

                Eh, I'm sorry, but that still doesn't back the source. Those sentences, as best Google translate tells me, say: "Nerves were also fraying at Villa Louvigny. English announcers there feared a strike by the Irish organization, the IRA. ... Consequently, the city park was cordoned off." That doesn't say additional security was posted at the Villa, and the Villa Louvigny seems to be a building, not the city park. I know this is nitpicking, but given this is such a controversial sentence, it needs accurate sourcing. --GRuban (talk) 23:06, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

                I understand. I've removed this part completely from the article for now. If I can find some better references that specifically cover this in better detail then I will readd. mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

        • "With 129 votes "Tu te reconnaîtras" is the highest-scoring song ... maximum score on offer."
          • The O'Connor reference is a table which lists the highest-scoring Eurovision entries up to 2009; this was included as a courtesy, as I believe the assertion here would be covered under WP:CALC even without a reference.
            • Yeah, but we need a source for this to indicate that this matters, that the world cares. We might as well write "this is the only winning song to include the circumflex î in the title", or "this is the only winning song directed by a Luxembourgish conductor", or a dozen other irrelevancies. --GRuban (talk) 21:14, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
              • I've added an additional reference covering this, to show its relevance. mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

                 Done, Thank you --GRuban (talk) GRuban (talk) 23:08, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

      • One I was able to get to, thanks, says Jacques Raymond and Lily Castel replaced Nicole and Hugo. Our article should say that; they each have articles, so should probably be linked to; and each of those articles say they participated in the 1971 Eurovision, since you mention their backing singer Claude Lombard was a 1968 participant, we should probably say that; and that means the first row in the "Eurovision Song Contest 1973 participants" table, Artist column, is strictly incorrect, Nicole and Hugo were not participants, Raymond and Castel were. If you want to note both Nicole and Hugo as planned and Raymond and Castel as their replacements, in that box or table somehow, I'll accept that.
        • I believe there is some confusion here; Raymond and Castel replaced Nicole and Hugo and participated in their place at the 1971 contest (i.e. two years prior to the subject of this article), not the 1973 contest. I felt that the wording in the article was pretty clear about that, but please do let me know if a rewrite is needed to make it even clearer.
          •  Done Yes, I misread that source, mea culpa. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
            • Actually, do clarify a bit: "Nicole and Hugo had originally been selected to represent Belgium in 1971, however the duo were replaced after Nicole contracted jaundice;[15][16] among the Belgian duo's backing singers was Claude Lombard" Lombard was a backing singer in 1973, or 71? I'm guessing 73, but make it clear. --GRuban (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
              • Lombard is mentioned here because she is a former representative for Belgium in the contest as a solo artist in 1968, therefore as a past participant returning as a backing performer she is considered a notable individual to be mentioned. mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2026 (UTC)
                • Clearly I'm not being clear. I'll just do it so we can clear this up. C...orrect? --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
      • "Broadcasters competing in the event were required ..." this whole paragraph is cited to the 2023 rules. Since this is about a contest 50 years before that, and especially since earlier paragraphs in our article specify important rules changes that were made with this very version, proving these rules clearly do change over time, I don't think we can just use the 2023 rules as the source for the 1973 rules. Sorry. Either find something much closer to the 1973 rules or something that says they haven't changed in 50 years.
        • That does make sense, no need to apologise. Finding an extant version of the rules from closer to this point in time would be quite a challenge. There are certainly sources out there that prove the link between the contest and its links to continental television broadcasting (e.g. ); please let me know if you believe any of these could be used instead of the current rules, and I'm happy to rewrite/edit as much as is necessary to get the wording satisfactory for you to tick this off.
          • Looks like the paragraph has been removed, or reformatted enough so I can't find it.  Done --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
   4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
      • Mostly have to AGF here, since I don't have the offline sources. I did run Earwig.
3. Broad in its coverage:
   1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[5] and
      • I would think this bit from our article Tu te reconnaîtras would stand mentioning: "Tu te reconnaîtras" is the only winning entry of Luxembourg with some level of local involvement. Although both Anne-Marie David, the composer Claude Morgan, and the lyricist Vline Buggy, were all French, the conductor Pierre Cao was Luxembourgish. You don't have to say "only", but saying "most FR, but one LUX", with a source, would be nice.
        • I was aware of that, however as you can see there is no source presented for this on that article. I can try and dig around for a source on this again, but I did not include it at the time of writing the article for WP:OR reasons.
          •  Done Yeah, I see what you mean, I dug around for it and couldn't find anything reliable either. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
      • "Following the contest, the Spanish entry "Eres tú", written by Juan Carlos Calderón and performed by the group Mocedades, went on to achieve global success" - let's specify that it was the second place song but outperformed the winning song. That's implied, but let's be explicit.
        •  Not done --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
      • Also, since we're writing about the performance of the second place song, how did the first place song do? Did it chart at all, or did it disappear immediately? We can't write as much as we do about the second place song without going into at least some depth about the first.
        •  Not done --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
          • Eh, I now see guess you did write "all achieved considerable success" ... kind of wishy-washy, I'd prefer more details, but we've done so much work here that I'll take it. I'll rewrite it a bit to simplify and remove redundancy, I hope that's all right? --GRuban (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
      • May also consider a few words about the third, which, I think, was also successful; but not necessary, unlike the above.
   2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
      • The first paragraph of Detailed voting results is really, really detailed. I recommend leaving out most of it; unless there was controversy about specifics, the groups of three countries, etc., are precisely the details we don't want to memorialize forever. If there was controversy, or some other reason the exact system was important, cite that. If that is in the offline sources (Roxburgh?), give the excerpt.
        •  Done Still a bit detailed for my taste, but better; I'll take it. --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
      • The entire paragraph given to the order of rehearsals also seems a bit much. The fact that it's only cited to one source also implies that most sources didn't care very much. The rehearsals weren't aired, right? So - why do we care? I think most readers will pretty much take it as given that the bands rehearsed their numbers, and am not sure why readers will care what order they did it in. Again, unless you have a source that says that band A saw band B performing and changed their number in some noticeable way based on this, in which case we should absolutely say that.
        •  Done --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)
      • I'm also impressed by your references for the broadcasters and commentators in participating and non-participating countries; these two tables have more sources than the rest of the article put together! Don't remove them now that you've done all this work, wow - but I have to say, the effort to impact ratio here is rather large.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
   • Yes. I don't see many controversies about this year online; the Israel security is mentioned, there was also something about the Eres Tu Brez Besed similarity, and something about the voting system, but not much from the most reliable sources.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.[6]
   • Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:[7]
   1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
      • Yes
   2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
      • Why is there a lone picture of Cliff Richard high in the article Participants section? I mean, yes, he was a participant, but there were many, why single him out with an image? He wasn't the winner; in fact there is no picture of the winner! I guess he was one of three who returned, but that's not really such a huge deal compared to winning, and the other two who returned don't have pictures. It's a nice picture in itself, and I really, really like images in articles, but this one is giving him undue weight. Either delete it, or add more nice pictures to balance it so his isn't so prominent, especially compared with the winner not getting any picture at all.
        • I chose Cliff Richard for this section specifically because: 1) the picture is era-appropriate and shows Richard similar to how he was when he competed in the 1973 contest; 2) he was a former participating artist, and specifically because he was an artist which had previously come second, i.e. almost winning; and 3) because he is mentioned in prose at the top of the section. I didn't include a picture of Anne-Marie David because she wasn't included in prose in this section, and nor is there a free option which shows her as she was in 1973. I had considered placing one of the free images we do have of her in the "Contest overview" section, but I opted for Mocedades here because it is era-appropriate, and I didn't want to over-illustrate the article. If you still disagree here let me know and we can work on this together to satisfy both WP:GA? and WP:GACN.
          • I'm afraid I do still disagree. The fact that this is the first image in the article makes it seem like it is the representative image for the article, and it shouldn't be. I see the options to include, earlier, File:Annemariedavid.jpg, which, true, isn't what she looked like in 1973, but I gather this is one of the jewels in her crown even today; to include the Cliff Richard photo in a group of artists that competed in the contest, a gallery or something; or to leave out the Cliff Richard photo. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)
            • I'd just like to point out that the first image in the article is actually the logo for the contest itself, even though it is embedded in the infobox. Additionally, I'm not sure how a photo of Cliff Richard, who was a participant in the contest and is mentioned in prose in the section itself, would not satisfy WP:GA?. I understand where you're coming from, but David is not mentioned in the prose in this section, and therefore it would be much more relevant to include any picture of her within the "Contest overview" section anyway, given that this is where her victory is covered in much greater detail. I can certainly add File:Annemariedavid.jpg to the article, but I would object to placing it in the "Participants" section given the points I already raised. mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2026 (UTC)
            • Yes, please for the winner's image. For the participant section image, would you consider this? Since we are fortunate enough to have 1970-ish images for each of the three returnees? I can't insist on it, of course. --GRuban (talk) 00:00, 20 July 2026 (UTC)
              • Thanks for the suggestion. I've now added both the David image, as well as the additional imagery for the three returnees.
                • Thank you, it looks beautiful! --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Massimo Ranieri, Cliff Richard, and Marion Rung respectively represented Italy, the United Kingdom, and Finland, each for a second time

Doing... --GRuban (talk) 16:40, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@MDEire: Pretty good, some things need fixing, but not too many. --GRuban (talk) 15:52, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

@GRuban: Thanks for picking this one up (and apologies for my username rename confusion lol)! I'll take a look at your comments and suggestions over the weekend and get this article finished up! mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

@GRuban: My compliments on a thorough review! I have made some changed to the article to reflect some of your points, and I have reverted back to you with my own comments, which I have placed immediately below the relevant bullet points. Please do let me know your thoughts, what further action you believe is necessary, and hopefully we can get this review wrapped up successfully in no time! mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, most of your replies accepted, a few not, but there are multiple points you haven't responded to yet. --GRuban (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that's everything covered now. Please do correct me if I'm wrong though, if I've missed anything you've raised that I haven't addressed. :) mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 11:49, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Almost everything, I marked the missing pieces " Not done" above, and added a few hopefully clarifying sentences. Also one request was trivial so I did it myself, and I rewrote the performance of three songs paragraph more than trivially, and hopefully correctly. --GRuban (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

@GRuban: Thank you for taking the initiative with rewriting some of these paragraphs for me. I'm happy with the outcome of these. I believe I've now addressed all the "not dones" above, but please do let me know if there's anything else or if you have any further comments. mdeire (formerly Sims2aholic8) (talk) 07:57, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I think you have. Thank you for your good article, now officially your Good Article. --GRuban (talk) 12:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.