Jump to content

Talk:European Broadcasting Union

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

Libya

[edit]

Libya - just browsing the EBU members page, I've noticed that there's now the inclusion of the "Libyan national channel" with a logo but no link or further info. See here - http://www3.ebu.ch/cms/en/members?jsite=c49010fa-a809-4b28-a2c8-7363e32879c5 (towards the bottom) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.240.78 (talk) 21:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

[edit]

Just to point out that the Welsh script somebody put in the 'National Script' section for the United Kingdom table entry currently aligns with the 'Independent Television' line, rather than 'Sianel 4 Cymru' as it should. I don't know how to edit this so have left it for others to correct. 195.99.89.167 (talk) 13:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The text is just vertically centred in the box like all the others. -- AxG / ✉ / 10 years of editing 13:39, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Important events

[edit]

The theme music played before EBU broadcasts is Marc-Antoine Charpentier's Prelude to Te Deum. It is well known to Europeans as it is played before and after the Eurovision Song Contest and other important events.

As an European i'm intrigued as to what these 'other important events' are. I'll admit that as it's played before/after EBU broadcasts including Eurovision most would regonise it but not so far as to identify it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zander Brown (talk • contribs) 21:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

European Athletics Championship is another example. Marianna Costa (talk) 21:11, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on European Broadcasting Union. 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) 23:41, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Channel 31 (Kazakhstan)

[edit]

Channel 31 is listed as an associate member, however this channel is not listed as an associate member on the EBU's website.[1] Should it still be listed here?

References

  1. ^ "33 ASSOCIATES IN 21 COUNTRIES". EBU. EBU. Retrieved 22 December 2017.

Robyn2000 (talk) 09:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

[edit]

Does Israel is a member or not? it missing from the map in the infobox and sated "pending" in the table. The 2018 ESC is coming up, so is there an answer? Sokuya (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ebu no longer redirects here

[edit]

now it goes to a town in china. please either fix it or remove the redirect txt.84.212.111.156 (talk) 15:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"EBU" does redirect here, but "Ebu" does not. -- AxG / ✉  15:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To not merge EBU R128 into European Broadcasting Union and to discuss an alternative proposal elsewhere. Klbrain (talk) 15:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the significance of EBU R128 and the lack of content in the article, I propose that the article be merged into European Broadcasting Union under its own section. — Mr X ☎️ 01:17, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - Article was a redirect (to LKFS) until this May. Let's give it more time and see if we can improve it. There are plenty of sources available and it is notable. The article is short simply because no one has worked on it. ~Kvng (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I have no opinion in regard to whether or not the EBU R 128 article should be merged here; however, I note that the German article may contain much useful information about this subject. It would be great to know things like what is the present status of this 8-year-old recommendation? Things like that would be helpful to readers whether the merge takes place or not.  Painius  put'r there  00:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Merge as its own section seems like an odd proposal. The article is just about a specific guideline; one of probably hundreds of guidelines. What makes it notable enough to dedicate a whole section to it? Shouldn't the EBU article just state that being a member means complying with many guidelines, such as audio signal strength, etc (whatever else there is)? Grk1011 (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - A year later and the article is still only two sentences with one reference. I propose merging it into LKFS instead, where EBU R128 redirects to. Googol30 (talk) 22:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Klbrain has now suggested EBU R128 be merged to LKFS instead. I remain opposed for the reasons I stated above. ~Kvng (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have improved EBU R 128 using material from the german version of the article. We are no longer have the "lack of content" situation identified by Mr Xaero and Googol30. I suggest this discussion be closed and merge banners removed. ~Kvng (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - the issue is whether LUFS/LKFS and EBU 128 R have enough differences to have their own articles. They appear to be very similar standards; therefore the articles could end up duplicating each other. Jonpatterns (talk) 12:22, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's Klbrain's new proposal so I guess we can either leave this open to continue discussion of that (I have already weighed in above). It might be cleaner to close this and open a new discussion if someone thinks a merge consensus on the new proposal is within reach. ~Kvng (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I would like to do a clarification about the matter, as far as I know:
    – LUFS and LKFS are measurement units specifically designed to measure loudness as it is perceived by the human ear (they not measure "plain" audio level). They are two different names to describe the exact same unit: Loudness Units related to Full Scale, K-weighted.
    – EBU R 128 is a standard recommendation about loudness normalization and uses a standardized method of loudness measurement. EBU R 128 uses -23 LUFS as a reference level for audio normalization.
    – ITU BS.1770 is an analogous standard, with the exact same purpose.It uses -24 LUFS (or LKFS) as a reference level for audio normalization.
    – I think that EBU R 128 is used across all Europe; it's unclear to me where ITU have been adopted.
    My proposal is to keep EBU R 128 (and possibly renaming it to EBU R 128/ITU BS.1770 or to something similar, if consensus is reached), since the two are nearly identical standards with the same purpose and using the same methods (the only slight difference is the target level). LUFS and LKFS could be merged there, as the units used (and created) for these standards purposes. Lion-hearted85 (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ITU BS.1770 has no target level, it is a standard for measuring loudness and gives results in LUFS or LKFS units. R128 described how to use these measurements to regulate broadcast levels. ~Kvng (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, this is now clearer to me, too. Sorry for my inaccuracy. I read more carefully the EBU R 128 recommendation and I worked on the article in the past days. I think that, with the new edits in the last months, the article well describes the context, the recommendation, the method used and its adoption over time. Please, have a look at my changes if you have time. To avoid confusion, I have struck through the incorrect parts of my previous comment. Lion-hearted85 (talk) 00:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me! Let's close out this discussion with consensus not to merge? It's been two years it seems like a compromise has been found. Grk1011 (talk) 13:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We still have a proposal from Klbrain to merge LKFS and EBU R 128. Banners are still up on the respective articles for that proposal. There has not been any discussion on it for 2 months. ~Kvng (talk) 14:20, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your suggestion above to close this discussion and start a new one about the other two. This page (EBU) is no longer relevant to the merge discussion and it's counter-intuitive to discuss it here. Grk1011 (talk) 14:25, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in starting a new discussion. I advocate closing this discussion and removing the merge banners that point here. Someone else can start a new discussion with new merge banners if some merging is still desired. ~Kvng (talk) 14:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Suspension of BTRC

[edit]

The source about BTRC being suspended clearly states:

BTRC will have two weeks to respond, before suspension comes into effect.

So they have not been suspended yet, so they should not be listed yet as a "past member". ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In any case it would be suspended not expelled... so I would not put in any case under "past member" listDR5996 (talk) 17:23, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An IP address moved BTRC to past member section despite the official EBU website still listing them as a Member. I reverted the change and added a note linking to the relevant section in this article for more information about the suspension. Alucard 16❯❯❯ chat? 17:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Libya suspended ?

[edit]

Hello everyone, On the EBU website, here, is the list of EBU members. Libya is listed among the members. However, when clicking on the download list button (and, unfortunately, having to create an account), LNC of Libya is listed as a suspended member, just as Belarus. Should that be included in the article or not (knowing the fact that an account is needed to verify the info).

Yoyo360 (talk) 08:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Russia?

[edit]

On the map, Russia is coloured dark blue (member), however, the Russian broadcaster left the EBU.

Shouldn't Russia be grey in that case? ThisIsMemeboi (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone reads this, I'd like to point out that the EBU website shows Russian members as only suspended. It would seem they have never formally pulled out of the EBU, even though they inteded to (and the EBU confirmed it). I'm getting a bit confused here. Yoyo360 (talk) 09:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why no explanation, of why membership in the "European Broadcasting Union", has no connection with being in Europe or not?

[edit]

Northern Africa, and large (Asian) parts of the Middle East are members. Not just associate members, but proper ones. Why is there no mention, of how/why this is the case, for the supposedly "European" Broadcasting Union? One could argue that Turkey is European, because it technically does have some bits of it, that are in Europe (about 3% of the land, and close to that amount of the population), but that isn't true for any of the rest.
Surely that issue, is a significant and notable thing, that would be necessary to cover, to be encyclopedic? 94.255.134.204 (talk) 11:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't Israel included, under the controversies section?

[edit]

There are widespread protests, demanding that Israel be suspended, just like Russia was. For much the same reason. (i.e. their actions, which are investigated as a genocide by the ICJ, which has deemed the accusation to be credible) 94.255.134.204 (talk) 11:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't much of this in the context of Eurovision at this point though? That's covered extensively in those articles. Until an action happens (they withdraw or are excluded, etc.), I'd refrain from adding speculation to this article. Grk1011 (talk) 13:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"That's covered extensively in those articles."
No. No it isn't.
"Until an action happens (they withdraw or are excluded, etc.), I'd refrain from adding speculation to this article."
The controversy over the issue, and the protests, aren't speculation. It is fact ...and the section is called "controversies". Not "suspensions". 94.255.134.204 (talk) 16:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extensively here. Grk1011 (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

looking at the map (through the details of the file, the version on the page, at least on mobile, is insanely low quality) it's very noticeable that kosovo is absent? Not as in, isn't highlighted when it should be, but as in, isn't featured at all, it's borders are absent, instead part of serbia 2A00:23C5:C31B:A101:B16D:4637:EB2E:248A (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:European_Broadcasting_Union&oldid=1251186406"