Talk:2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

"Light that never goes out" section- nominators.

May i suggest a change to this section to include the athletes who nominated those who lit the couldron, i think this is key to the "inspire a generation notion that was being portrayed: Last sentence to read: "... each nominated by a famous British Olympian to convey the 2012 Games' aim to "inspire a generation. The Torch bearers were (nominee in brackets), Callum Airlie (Shirley Robertson), Jordan Duckitt (Dunken Goodhew), Desiree Henry (Daley Thompson) , Katie Kirk (Dame Mary Peters), Cameron MacRitchie (Sir Steve Rdgrave), Aidan Reynolds (Lynn Davies), and Adelle Tracey Dame Kelly Holmes)."

Source here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19024475 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.167.195 (talk) 12:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Jennie | ☎ 13:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Trevor Nelson

An editor has returned four times now to insert and re-insert the negative comment about BBC TV commentator Trevor Nelson into this article - the only contribution s/he has made to this article. Views as to whether this comment adds anything to an article that is about the Ceremony itself? --IanB2 (talk) 18:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The commentary on the US broadcasts has been written about. I see no problem with writing about the UK one. They are part of how we consumed the ceremony, after all. Only my opinion, but Trevor Nelson was pretty crap - he was in full-on witless meandering DJ mode when the occasion clearly called for something different. Mind you, Time Out didn't think much of Huw Edwards or Hazel Irvine's efforts either: [1]. Stronach (talk) 18:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I originally added that quote, and I had second thoughts when I did. Quite frankly, I think the quote may be more notable than the performance. I personally thought Nelson was reassuringly laid-back! It's hard to get any balance when only one source is used. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I find it difficult to imagine that anyone in their right mind would have thought that Trevor Nelson added anything positive to the whole Opening Ceremony experience with his inane comments. The same goes for the other interjections but Nelson's were the most grating. So bad that I found myself shouting "Shut up!" at the TV when they happened. And, pointedly, the broadcasters must have *known* that some people would find the interruptions unbearable; they even provided a commentary free soundtrack on one of their 'extra' channels somewhere but sadly it was not available to the majority of people who could only watch on regular digital or Freeview. Ant501UK (talk) 08:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

(ec) .. if I ever find my right mind, I will probably agree with you.. Subtitles would have been better. But watching it all again, without any commentary at all, seemed like the best option. That information about the commentary-free oprion might be usefully added. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. Reading the reviews the general opinion seems to be that the coverage was a success for the BBC but with individual commentators coming in for some stick. I've left the Nelson comment in but expanded the section with some references to other commentary on the BBC coverage, good and bad. Hopefully this gives a more rounded picture and more references for people to follow to get the range of views.IanB2 (talk) 10:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

...and, as if by magic... Thanks IanB2. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

3RR violations in editing history of the article

I've noticed in the editing history that several users have been consistently editing the page more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. I've warned the more recent ones, but there are still others in the history that may or maynot know the 3RR rules. Please see the policy at 3RR here for more details. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Heading titles

Does Wikipedia's manual of style not apply to section headings? I am referring specifically to the program section, which contains titles with ampersands, differing capitalization standards, etc. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:43, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The program headings I introduced yesterday are in exactly the same format as in the official Ceremony programme, except for "frankie & june.." where another editor has objected to the names being in lower case, despite this being the deliberate intention of the organisers to reflect modern SMS/internet usage. My view is that the format should ideally reflect the ceremony programme - unless more experienced editors suggest this should be overriden with a standard Wikipedia format? --IanB2 (talk) 18:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

As they are the names of the sections of the ceremony, they are proper names, and therefore should stay in the format in which they are written in the official guide. MoS does not over-rule proper names. Stronach (talk) 18:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Naah, they're composition titles, to which standard English capitalisation (title case) applies. Understand the SMS-speak reference, but this can be mentioned in the text. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 18:44, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

In that case, should any of the following be amended?:

• Happy & Glorious --> Happy and Glorious
• Frankie & June say... Thanks Tim --> Frankie and June say... Thanks Tim
• Abide With Me --> Abide with Me

Also, some of the capitalization is inconsistent (some are all lowercase, others capitalize more "significant" words). --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:11, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it's unfortunate that faithfulness to the original format may make the article appear scruffy and amatuerish. Any explanation in the article might be clumsy, but new readers might be a bit taken aback by wiki-pejaz trendy new look? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. We should follow Wikipedia's rules and render it all into standard English. It's quite possible the editing of the stadium brochure was sub-par, done in the very last second due to secrecy issues, etc. We don't have to follow that. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 07:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

How did Frankie message June if he had her phone?

I've watched the OC more times than is probably healthy to look for cultural references and the like that could be added here. But there seems to be one rather large plot hole in the "Frankie and June" section - if "that girl has dropped her phone", how did Frankie manage to message her? Or was it somehow through friends? If so, this isn't made clear. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 09:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi - My recollection is that June borrows a friend's phone to text or phone her own? Need to check again with the video. Not sure this is really fundamental however? IanB2 (talk) 09:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Maybe not, but it could use a brief clarification - since the communication between the two is seen to continue through the dance sequences ( I'm guessing you are right that June borrows a friend's phone to call her own number to find out who found it or something). FWIW, most of the communication involved - SMS, MMS, and calling on the phone, has nothing at all to do with Tim Berners-Lee. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 10:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair point - the explanation in the progamme is "Music connects us with each other and with the most important moments in our lives. One of the things that makes those connections possible is the World Wide Web". So there's a wider "connections" theme that embraces the internet, mobile telephony, and the way people have personal memories connected to modern music from their past. IanB2 (talk) 11:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Having looked at this again, I think you're right. At about 01:02:45 on the BBC 'no commentary' iPlayer recording, a ringing tone is superimposed over end of the Beatles' 'She loves you' and we see Frankie ringing June to say he's 'found her phone, where are you?', to which she replies 'we're on our way to the 70s'. She leaves her phone on the tube earlier at 01:01:15 and in the intervening one and a half minutes there isn't anything to explain how he knows how to contact her. At 1:02:07 we see Frankie standing amongst the audience looking at June dancing and appearing frustrated he can't contact her. I guess the most likely explanation is - since we know June texted and sent photos to her friends as they left for the night out - is that he uses one of her 'recently used' numbers to contact a friend who passes their phone over to June when he calls - but if so the TV coverage doesn't pick any of this up or explain. IanB2 (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

p.s. and strangely, June having spoken to Frankie and rung off at 1:03:07, texts him at 1:06:26 to ask his name. IanB2 (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm surprised you don't want to know what network she was using! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a crowded stadium but she's still getting pretty good reception, so there's a clue... IanB2 (talk) 20:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

How many were there?

Article says (but only in the opening section): "It was watched by an estimated audience of 62,000 in the Stadium.."

Supporting sources say:

• ".. 80,000 in the Olympic Stadium." [2]
• ".. watched by 62,000 people in the stadium." [3]
• "..70,800 people in the audience." [4]

If we can't get this right, um .... Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the explanation may be that the paying (and invited) audience amounted to about 62,000 - the 70,800 figure relates to the number of pixel paddles used to create the mega-screen around the stadium - as well as the paddles given to each audience member there will be other pixel units around the stadium, between rows, etc., explaining the higher number. The higher still 80,000 figure is likely to be the total number of people who witnessed the ceremony (at least in part) live, including the cast and the athletes.IanB2

That sounds like very sensible and well-informed WP:RS - all we have is the refs, that are contradictory. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:16, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks IanB2. But can anyone tell us, quite simply, how many were sat in the audience? The stadium article clearly says it has 25,000 + 55,000 = 80,000 seats. Surely it was filled to capacity? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

You're right - since the stadium capacity is 80,000 the 62,000 figure reported by the BBC does seem low. Another possibility might be that 62,000 tickets were sold with the balance of the stadium filled by invited VIPs, Heads of State, team coaches etc. Or that part of the stadium wasn't in use because of the requirements of the production - for example the platform for Wiggings to ring the bell, and the space taken by the Tor? Definitely needs more research. Still there's an even bigger discrepancy between the worldwide audience figure of 1 billion (based on the Beijing audience, where most of China tuned in) and the 4 billion figure given on the London 2012 website, which right now seems somewhat fanciful (in Canada - prosperous and with historic links to the UK, and daytime when the ceremony was shown - audience penetration was just under 50%. So 4/7ths of the world doesn't really seem credible)! Nevertheless the 4 billion figure is starting to circulate in the media IanB2

Having now been to the stadium and had the chance to look around, I'd estimate that the Tor took out at least 4,500 seats - including those behind the oak tree that were removed from sale (you can see these as empty on the video). Evelyn Glennie and the drummers were accommodated on a platform that was where the cauldron now is, but there were some seats taken by cast members (such as the choir that sung Jerusalem at the beginning). So unless I've missed something the stadium capacity (assuming 80,000 is the correct current figure) for the ceremony would have been reduced to somewhere around 75,000. Doubtless there was a handful of people who failed to make the performance, as there have been even for the most popular events since. And you can see several rows of unfilled seats right at the front as the horse-drawn buses arrive just after Branagh's speech, presumably unsold £2012 tickets. But the 62,000 figure still seems low, unless it excludes VIPs, olympic officials etc. who didn't pay for tickets? IanB2 (talk) 12:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Missing Mike Oldfield Music

The music for the jitterbug section is, quite simply, a jitterbug arrangement of Tubular Bells. You can hear the saxophones playing the piano melody.

The music after that, when the children are put to bed, is an excerpt from Part Two of Tubular Bells, specifically the "Peace" section.

The music from the dream sequence, starting with the return of the piano and extending until "In Dulci Jubilo," are the tracks "Secrets" and "Far Above The Clouds" from Tubular Bells III.

I cannot identify the music at the end, although it rings a bell (no pun intended). It may be an arrangement of a more obscure work, or it may have been written specifically for this ceremony. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chichiri47 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

the Abide With Me dance troupe

There are 52 dancers in the Abide With Me troupe: choreographer Akram Khan (in yellow outfit), 50 dancers (in red outfits) and a nine-year-old male dancer (name currently unknown). This number may be an acknowledgement of 52 people who didn't survive the 7/7 London bombings. Although I do have sources, I'm still not sure whether to include this in the main entry. Opinion? Thank you. 0zero9nine (talk) 17:06, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

We can judge that better if you share the sources Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The source is the televised dance clip itself. I should have clarified that in my original response. Sorry about that. 0zero9nine (talk) 09:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The programme suggests the 50 includes Mr Khan?

Yes, but it's surprisingly incorrect. Or perhaps it's to avoid controversy? Regardless, I noticed the number was off when I watched the Abides section, so I counted dancers. Did it again three times to be sure. Definitely 50 dancers in red + Mr. Khan in yellow + the little boy = 52 dancers. You can check it yourself. 0zero9nine (talk) 09:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Balloons carrying rings

I've been having trouble finding sources about the weather balloons sent up at the beginning of the ceremony, one of which supplied the image of the Olympic rings against the earth that was the final image in the closing fireworks and one of the highlights of the show. They are mentioned in passing in a few sources, but it would be good to know who made them, who tracked them, what the rings were made of (bronze?), and perhaps who found them when they came down again. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 21:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

There is some information about the latex balloons in the official programme and media guide, linked at the bottom of tha article .IanB2

Yep, though it's not especially comprehensive - for example, the pic in the programme suggests they did some trial runs. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 11:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

What's more, the media programme suggests that the balloon image was due to come at the very end of the show, rather than at the end of the Eclipse/fireworks segment (where it was very effective, IMO). I wonder if this was a last-minute change, and whether this helps account for the relative few mentions balloons got in the press coverage. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 13:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Extreme right British political views

Our "reviews" section in covering home reactions devotes quite a lot of space to extreme right views that are outliers in the British context. Rick Dewsbury, a columnist for the Daily Mail, attacked the use of Grime music, the depiction of multiracial families and of the National Health Service. MP Aidan Burley attacked part of the ceremony as " "leftie multicultural crap" but his comments were explicitly repudiated by his own party leader and by Conservative Mayor of London Boris Johnson. I've retained the coverage unchanged (at least for now) but have moved both items to a second paragraph. It would be an understatement to say that these views are not representative of the broader British reaction to the ceremony, nor even that of the political right in Britain as a whole. These chaps are really out there on their own. This could be made more evident in our article. --TS 17:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree, and have previously edited these views down to the mimimum compared to the material originally submitted. Sadly however it only takes a small minority of critics to stir up a (noteworthy) controversy, and although it's clear that the overwhelming view of the ceremony is that it was a huge success, I think we do need to give the contrary view some airtime, if only to make the point that it isn't a view that was widely shared? IanB2 (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to echo, I don't want to remove the criticism (which is a genuine part of the British reaction), but to set it in context. I have added the following text: "Though praise came from all points of the political compass, not all on the political right were happy. Columnist Rick Dewsbury ..." --TS 17:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to add - you don't need to find balance necessarily. If you think that the ceremony was received to acclaim universally then say so, sometimes things are just generally good. (See WP:GEVAL). Although, if various sources pick up on a negative, then it's probably best to include it to adhere to WP:NPOV. Jennie | ☎ 17:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Nudge

I've enjoyed watching this article expand leading up to and following the ceremony. I'd like to nudge significant contributors to consider nominating the article for GA status when they feel all criteria have been met. Another thought: perhaps a picture of Danny Boyle somewhere in the article? --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, good idea re pic of Boyle. I've added one. Ericoides (talk) 16:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I imagine the lead will need to be expanded prior to GAN. Time to check out the article for the closing ceremony...! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi - I have had a go at doing this, filling out the overview of the event and dropping some of the detailed facts, such as the finishing time and the UK and US viewing figures, into the body of the article IanB2 (talk) 06:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

iPlayer

The schedule of music provides times to the BBC iPlayer record of the ceremony and links at the bottom to the version with the BBC commentary. If we reference to a particular version of the performance I'd suggest the non-commentary version is better: the BBC commentary isn't really part of the performance, and people wanting to hear particular music would better be directed to versions not overridden by the commentators' comments? However since most iPlayer files only remain on the BBC website for a time-limited period, do we want to include references to timespots in a particular file that could well disappear in the future? IanB2 (talk) 07:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

All content of the Olympics will remain on the BBC website until January 2013.http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2012/08/olympics-2012-viewing-figures.shtml -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 15:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the reader feedback the most common reason for people to come away disappointed from this page is that they were looking for a video of the ceremony but didn't find one. We have a link to the BBC Sport version at the bottom of the page (I'm not clear on whether, exceptionally, this is available to worldwide viewers - I think being on BBC Sport rather than iPlayer it may be?). But clearly people aren't spotting it in the list right at the bottom of the page, below our comprehensive (!) list of references. What's the best way of making clear at the top of the page somewhere that there's a link to a video at the bottom, if that's why people find their way to the page? IanB2 (talk) 07:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jennie--x (talk · contribs) 10:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Initial Comments

• Lead

• The statement "Prior to London 2012 there had been considerable apprehension about Britain’s ability to stage an opening ceremony that would reach the standard set by the Beijing Summer Games in 2008" needs referencing. Although it is understood from the sources that Beijing's opening ceremony was thought of being as spectacular, there is no indication of there being considerable apprehension about Britain's efforts.  Done

• Preparations

• "The London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) selected Danny Boyle as the director of the ceremony." This needs a citation.  Done
• Ref #19 does not provide a correct citation.  Done
• The last sentence of the lead (The ceremony was also remarkable for its use of children...) and paragraph 2 of the Preparations section (In preparing the ceremony Boyle gave significant emphasis to the London 2012 theme 'inspire a generation'...) both say the same thing, but don't provide referencing. The use of 'remarkable' (without citation) is a peacock term.  Done

Thanks for these comments! I have added references for the prior concerns about being able to match Beijing, a reference for Boyle's appointment, and for Inspire a Generation being the 2005 bid theme (and re-worded to remove the offending word). IanB2 (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Jennie | ☎ 14:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I've replaced Ref #19 (now Ref #24 due to the inserted refs) with another that provides the citation IanB2 (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again! Jennie | ☎ 17:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Officials and guests

•  Done

• Proceedings

• Second to the right... - The sentence "A celebration of children's literature by British authors began with J. K. Rowling reading a section from J. M. Barrie's Peter Pan" could possibly be made clearer. Is it a celebration of British authors? Or a celebration by British authors? The segment wasn't really a celebration of British authors (more Children's literature), and the segment only featured one author so it can't really be a celebration by authors.  Done

Agree. I've made a couple of changes, firstly to make clear that the sequence was a two-part celebration (NHS, moving onto children's books), and then to split the sentence here into two. I've said "children's books" rather than "British children's books" but by this point in the article the "British" bit can perhaps be taken as read? IanB2 (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC

I'd say British can be taken as read. Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Welcome - There is a "Citation needed" tag on a statement that may be considered challenging. Can this be cited?  Done

That was mine - I've read a LOT about the ceremony and not seen the suggestion that the nameplates were based on old railway ones anywhere. The editor added this in a couple of times so I added the tag hoping s/he would be able to support it. I suspect this may be a personal judgement from a railway enthusiast that can't be supported by citation, so I've edited it out again IanB2 (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC) p.s. looking at a close-up photo, they are reasonably distinctive and I've a feeling the fact may be correct. It's a shame we can't source it IanB2 (talk) 17:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll tag this as not done for now and try and look for a source. Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Update: I couldn't find anything either! This would go against the guidelines of using original research, but it is a shame that there is no source available - it's an interesting fact. Jennie | ☎ 19:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• The sentence that follows the Citation needed tag, "who was wearing a dress made entirely from fabric printed with photos of people who had applied to be 2012 Olympic volunteers.", needs either sourcing or removing as it could be challenged.  Done

This one is definitely true. I've added a ref IanB2 (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Let the Games Begin - "This was a break with tradition as the Flag had previously been carried only by athletes." - Needs sourcing.  Done

I've taken this out as have been unable to source it. IanB2 (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a difficult thing to claim - especially seeing as the further in the past the games, the less information Wikipedia (and the internet in general) seem to hold on them. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• There Is A Light That Never Goes Out - "(the petals will accompany each team home after the Games)" - Needs sourcing.  Done

Done IanB2 (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Reviews

•  Done

• TV coverage

• "The BBC's coverage was the most-watched televised event of the year in the United Kingdom, averaging approximately 24.24 million viewers, and peaking at approximately 26.9 million viewers." - Statistics need sourcing.  Done

Done IanB2 (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It has to be said that the much criticised commentary was forced upon *all* TV viewers using regular Digital Terrestrial services and Freeview. A commentary-free version was available on Satellite but it was *not* available on the BBC Red Button (despite some people's assurances to the contrary). Ant501UK (talk) 12:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

• Music

•  Done

• Technical aspects

• "as well as 7,346 square metres (1.815 acres) of turf including crops." - Statistics need sourcing.

Done IanB2 (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• There is a citation tag in this section that needs taking care of also.  Done

This contribution was added by someone who (from the way it was originally worded) I am guessing was a technical volunteer, so doubt it can be sourced independently. I've removed the detail of how the volunteers were organised since this isn't really important as far as the ceremony is concerned IanB2 (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 19:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Ceremony key team

•  Done

• References

•  Done

Overall Summary

I've placed the article on hold for now. There seems to be an issue with the fair-use rationale of the image used in the "Let the Games Begin" section. Could editors ensure that the image has valid and free use claims? It seems like the image went under discussion as to whether to keep or delete, in either case, editors need to remove the "deletion notice" or the picture (depending on the outcome of the discussion). Thanks. Jennie | ☎ 17:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

The outcome was to keep - I have removed the deletion tag. Thanks and congrats, 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony has passed to GA status! Jennie | ☎ 16:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Jennie for all your hard work checking and reviewing! IanB2 (talk) 20:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

GA review Final Summary
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): Y b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Y It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): Y b (citations to reliable sources): Y c (no original research): Y It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): Y b (focused): Y It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: Y It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: Y It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): Y b (suitable captions): Y
Overall: Pass/Fail: Pass
· · ·

Help needed!

Could I put in a request for all you lovely editors who helped make this fabulous page to consider helping out at 2012 Summer Paralympics opening ceremony? It's not in a very good state and the ceremony is tonight. Thanks! 86.134.91.171 (talk) 15:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Abide with me/Memorial Wall/7/7 Bombings

I'm not sure that we can use this in the article itself, but I wanted to clarify that the "Abide with me" section of the Opening Ceremony was not exclusively a reference to the 7th July 2005 atrocities on the London Underground. I was lucky enough to be in the audience at the opening ceremony and I think it would be useful if I copy here the text of an e-mail that I, in common with all ticket-holders at the opening ceremony received on 14 July 2012. It was entitled "Add your touch to the Olympic Opening Ceremony" and "Include your loved ones in or Commemorative wall" it said:

"Olympic Opening Ceremony 2012

As you are an esteemed member of our audience for the evening, we would like to create, with your help, a commemorative board featuring a family member or dear friend who has passed away recently.

My Dad was a mad Olympics fan and would have been 91 on 27 July 2012, so I’ll be including him.

If you would care to email a photo of your loved one, we will do our best to include each one in this moment of remembrance. No animals on this particular occasion I’m afraid.

If you have purchased tickets for or on behalf of guests, friends and family they can also submit a photo, however, they must be submitted via the ticket purchasers email account. Please only attach one photograph to each email you send.

Thank you for considering this and, rain or shine, see you on 27th!

Submit your photograph to photosubmissions@london2012ceremonies.com by 18 July 2012. Photos should be no larger than 3MB in size.

Danny Boyle Artistic Director, London 2012 Olympic Games Opening Ceremony"

The "Abide with Me" segment, in my opinion, and it is only that, was a moment for everyone to reflect on the universal experience of mortality and loss, and was not limited to the horror felt by Londoners in the wake of the bombings of seven years ago- for example, it was a very apt moment for the relatives of the Israeli athletes killed in 1972 to remember and commemorate. Personally, I was nauseated by the reports of NBC'S reasons for removing this segment from their tape-delayed broadcast of the ceremony, but that's simply my opinion. I've not been able to find a media source to quote, so we're a bit stuck about using it in the article, sadly, but others may have more luck. Moldovanmickey (talk) 00:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi - that's a very good point, and one that is supported by the official media guide and other material issued to support the ceremony. Abide with me has long association with sport, particularly with tragic moments in sport, and I agree that it's clear from the guide that Boyle intended the memorial wall and the segment that followed to be a general memorial rather than being specific to 7/7. Arguably (and this is just opinion!) following the controvery about the ceremony not being the right place to include a minute's silence for 1972, Boyle managed to insert two separate minutes' into what was otherwise a lively upbeat ceremonial, with both of these defined in sufficiently general terms as to embrace memorial for 1972. Taking the argument to its limit one might speculate that the purpose was made deliberately ambiguous - but of course this could be for a variety of reasons: perhaps Boyle thought this would be artistically more appropriate (linking to his general liking for broad themes), or he wanted to produce something everyone could relate to their own personal loss, or he wished avoid having a 'badged' memorial section after the argument over 1972. Or it was a very subtle way to show up the IOC, we shall never know?

As far as 7/7 is concerned, the media widely reported the link between the second memorial segment and 7/7 (and I believe the photos included some 7/7 victims, though I can't reference this?) - for example the BBC commentary notes were "Ladies and gentlemen, please pause silent for our memorial wall for friends and family who can't be here tonight. The excitement of that moment in Singapore seven years ago when England won the games was tempered the next day with sorrow from the events of July 7th that year. A wall of remembrance for those no longer here to share in this event" and in the TV broadcast more or less these words were used, if rearranged somewhat. The 7/7 reference was picked up widely by print and online media - including during the debate about NBC's coverage to which you refer - and since Boyle met personally with Huw Edwards and other BBC officials to brief them before the performance, I think we can say that the link was intended. So we tried in our few words to pick up both the general and the specific 7/7 link. Nevertheless, if you don't think the article's wording emphasises sufficiently the general nature of the memorial, please feel free to put forward a tweak to the wording? IanB2 (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

In the Amy Raphael book Danny Boyle: Creating Wonder, Boyle is quoted as having asked Akram Khan to 'go away and think about mortality' as his brief for the dance/remembrance section. Boyle also said of it 'We knew that thousands of the fittest people in the world were about to walk into the stadium to tumultuous applause and standing ovation. There's nobody fitter than those athletes. They are at the peak of physical health .... But one day they will all die. Just like the rest of us. I thought 'Abide with Me' would be a wonderful way of reminding us of two things that we all share, but that nobody wants to talk about: birth and death. Everybody lives a different life between those two events, but there is no escaping our mortality. It was apposite to remind people of this ... It's a contrarian idea ... I wanted that contrariness to inform a moment in the opening ceremony, rather than just steaming forward in gung-ho fashion.'

He also said of 'Abide with Me' - 'It was much harder to use in an original and striking way in the opening ceremony [than in his film 28 Days Later, which had also featured a simple version of the song sung by a woman] because of its long relationship with sport and its religious connotations. Emili and Akram did so brilliantly. Regardless of anyone's faith, it's a really important song. It felt like a lovely way of extending the section on remembrance.' (pp. 433-4).

Boyle also talked about the minute's silence section in the Pandemonium part of the ceremony, and the photo montage, including his father's photo. However, he doesn't make any mention of 7/7 in all this. That might suggest it was framed as a general remembrance section, but with obvious events that would be at the forefront of people's minds (7/7 and 1972) given the context, though not made explicit.

The section in the official programme makes no mention of those specific events either: 'This hymn was written by Henry Francis Lyte in 1847 on his deathbed. He passed away three weeks after finishing it. Its honest expression of the fear of approaching death has made it popular with people of all religions and none. It was Mahatma Gandhi's favourite hymn and it was the hymn that the band was playing on the Titanic when it sank. It has an indelible association with sport. It has been sung by tens of thousands of spectators at every FA Cup Final since 1927 and every Rugby Challenge Cup Final since 1929.' (Official programme p. 29). Stronach (talk) 08:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

BBC tribute

One thing I want to add to the article but now can't remember where I read/saw it - Danny Boyle said he wanted to do a tribute section to the BBC, another great and much-loved British national institution, in the ceremony, but reluctantly had to drop the idea because it would be seen as biased, as the BBC was the event's broadcaster. Anyone got any clue where he said this? I have a feeling it was in a video interview rather than a print one, but can't be sure. Stronach (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I have't come across that anywhere - although there's enough historic TV footage in the ceremony to suggest he effectively built the tribute in, anyway. The biggest late cut was the BMX bike section, but I am not sure how that would have fitted into the programme? IanB2 (talk) 10:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

The idea was dropped while they were still in the early brainstorming/planning stages, that much I remember. I think the BMX section was going to be an expansion of the 'Come Together' dove bike section. Stronach (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Featured article?

This is certainly a good article, and I'm thinking it might be deserving of featured article status. It's certainly more comprehensive than any other article about the opening ceremony on the web. Thoughts? ProhibitOnions ^(T) 15:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I think it should be considered as well. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:52, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree, this article should be considered for FA.--Dingowasher (talk) 22:59, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

That makes three votes of confidence across three calendar years. But who is brave enough to do the deed? :) Might be worth starting with a peer review... --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:48, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Ticket prices

Is it not an option adding the ticket prices for the opening ceremony. Price range between 20.12 - 2012 Pounds? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, if we can find a reliable source. I'm sure there's one out there...? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony

Cyberbot II has detected links on 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://guru.bafta.org/hamish-hamilton-olympics-super-bowl-and-multi-camera-directing

  Triggered by \bguru\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

One mystery solved and another created..

Danny Boyle's own cut of the ceremony is showing tonight on BBC3. This has resolved the mystery of how Frankie contacts June after she loses her phone, as Danny has sensibly included the shot of June's friend handing June her phone, when Frankie calls - this shot didn't make the BBC coverage nor the ABS version on Youtube.

interestingly tonight's footage also included a very brief shot of someone standing inside the tube trains being projected onto the large house, whilst "going underground" was playing. Was this someone in particular, I wonder?

A the phone was her sisters. The tube train I have a funny feeling, although it wasn't seen particularly well, that it was Mayor Ken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.187.235 (talk) 22:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

It was indeed Ken Livingstone. In the BBC Olympics DVD box set there is an extra of the who animated sequence of 'Thanks Tim...' which was projected onto the house, and Ken can be very easily spotted. Only appropriate he gets a reference considering the work he did to get London the Games as Mayor.--Richj1209 (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

See the Simpsons stealing first base episode surely a massive nod here or to what that episode was homaging at the end of the section (the kiss). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.26.26 (talk) 18:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

In the BBC documentary screened 17/716 Boyle clarifies that Frankie uses last number redial to contact her sister IanB2 (talk) 06:16, 18 July 2016 (UTC)