Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2008/Archive 3

message: Can someone else agree that the UK will split into the home nation, there are no sources out there to confirm this. --AxG @ ►talk 15:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not found anything which suggests this either, and I would be personally surprised if it went ahead. Camaron1 | Chris 17:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland 

message: I can finally say that,after visiting the Moldovan National Television TRM website,can confirm that Moldova will participate in Eurovision in Belgrade.
Link here: http://trm.md/index.php?module=proiect_int&proiect_id=5  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 14:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moldova 

message: I don' want to offend anybody, but it getting beyond a joke really. The Eurovision song contest started off between the European countries, then it spread to Eastern Europe which is fine because they are in Europe, but to have North african countries and arabic countries in it aswell is going too far. A) they are not in Europe and B) there is enough countries already taking part, i mean the officials have already introduced new systems to eliminate countries (Semi Final). And, I have always wondered how Israel is in it aswell? I don't mean to be rude, but you can see my point! Hamilton365 22:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Euro?? vision 

message: Macedonia confirmed participation:
Link: http://www.vest.com.mk/default.asp?id=143109&idg=7&idb=2215&rubrika=%40ivot
Tittle:
ИСТЕКУВА РОКОТ ЗА ПРИЈАВУВАЊЕ ЗА ИЗБОРОТ НА ПЕСНА ЗА ЕВРОВИЗИЈА
Македонија го чека новиот шеф на делегација  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 14:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republic of Macedonia 

message: Ukryan1992 (talk · contribs) added a clean-up tag to the article without comment. Can I ask that he/she please say what in the article needs cleanup, so I can try and make the corrections. Thanks. Camaron1 | Chris 18:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup?

message: I have noticed a lot of new info has been added recently on countries and there possibility of entering the contest. However a lot of it is unsourced (see WP:V) and is not in a tone appropriate for an encyclopedic article (see WP:NPOV,WP:OR). I am going to clean/remove the text tagged shortly unless any objections are raised. Camaron1 | Chris 11:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New information issues

message: Is very likely that Armenia and Georgia will participate in the next contest, however if you dont provide a reliable source, because if we start confirming countries out of nowhere.. Then people will start putting Italy, Algeria and Kosovo as confirmed participants.
According to esctoday.com, Montenegro might withdraw from the contest... Therefore, is NOT a confirmed participant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed they did, in this article. The new article provides hardly any new information, it merely states Montenegro has not announced rules for their national selection but it doesn't mean they are planning to withdraw. 91.155.222.226 07:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The same question was happening with Macedonia.Macedonia confirmed that it will participate according to the newspaper,however Macedonia didn't give to the EBU any informations regarding the fee that needs to be paid for participating in the contest.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 12:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Macedonia is confirmed by the broadcaster http://www.mrt.com.mk/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4063&Itemid=34Zaqqq 13:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenia, Georgia and Montenegro still UNCONFIRMED 

message: so.. can anyone tell em what is wrong about putting the national final details on those pages.. I was doing a couple on friday, and suddenly they were all deleted (only Andorra was left). It would be nice to have all those pages open, so members can add information about the National finals.. I won't do it again, because I don't wanna write all of them again, just to get them deleted a few hours later.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 entries pages 

message: Do we give a reason for the countries who will not participate?I tried to create an article about all of them...I think if we write who participate and who doesnt participate we need to state why they dont participate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis (talk • contribs) 14:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no problem with giving a reason for countries not participating, however this section is going to need a clean and a lot of the references have been lost. In particular I was very surprised to learn that Jordan and Egypt are the only countries that recognise the State of Israel, I am going to come back and clean it if nobody beats me to it. Camaron1 | Chris 17:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, I have cleaned it up and added some missing EBU members that will not participate, I have removed Liechtenstein as it is not a EBU member. Camaron1 | Chris 20:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe that section should just be removed... It is not in any of the previous eurovision pages (unless its a withdrawing country) so why do you guys want to keep it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have rolled back the article to before mass content and reference removal. My reason is as follows: I don't see the problem with it, the information provided is encyclopedic and is mostly referenced. If the section is going to stay, cut down or not, it should be at the very least referenced. The previous articles are not yet classed as good or featured, so I do not agree that they should dictate the content of this article. As already said, size of this article is currently a long way from been a issue. Camaron1 | Chris 19:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  I agree. Non-participating countries have, by definition, nothing to do with the event this article is about. It's reasonable to explain withdrawals since the previous ESC but explaining why a country that hasn't taken part in ages (or ever) still doesn't makes little sense here. Such information could be useful in the article Participation in the Eurovision Song Contest. 91.155.222.226 (talk) 07:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non participating countries:

message: Why they gonna withdraw?The were the earliest country to announce that they will participate in Belgrade?Is ORF crazy?They skipped 2006 contest and now 2008,hopefully they will return in 2009 then...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 04:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Austria

message: OMG.. I dont think i wanna edit this page anymore.. there is always somebody tryin to screw it over.. now a bunch of information was lost.. Im sorry but I had to delete all the individual entries.. that was just crazy.. If somebody can put back the notes in the participant's table.. it will be very appreciated.. thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * The thing is: If you are deleting content from articles without explaining why in the edit summary (as you did here ), then other editors might see this as vandalism (removing content from articles is considered vandalism). Regards User Doe    ☻T   ☼C  04:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

text: * You can keep on working on the article (and maybe readd the info), but please write something in the edit summary if you are deleting content from articles. This will make it easier for other editors/RCPs (so they will not consider it as vandalism). Regards User Doe    ☻T   ☼C  04:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHAT A DISASTER!!!!! 

message: The following sentence is not correct, "The newest EBU members, Azerbaijan and San Marino will debut at the 2008 contest."  SMRTV has been an active member of the EBU since 1995, but is only participating for the first time in the Song Contest in 2008.  I will change this sentence to be more accurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewriter2120 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: San Marino is not one of the Newest EBU members

message: We sure know that Slovakia and Morocco won't compete.. so the colour should be changed.. I also believe that u should continue using the shades of green.. The austrian map is outstanding from all the others.. and its just a withdrawing country.. but it looks like if it was the host country..  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the map based on your comments. Also I'm sorry if you didn't like the separate individual entries section, but I really thought calling it a disaster was a bit harsh. Chwech 21:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MAP 

message: Does anyone know when the presenters of the ESC 2008 will be announced? Islenska2007x (talk) 15:41, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Presenters

message: Hey,I just saw somebody added Elli Kokkinou to the rumored Greek entrants..Well,she officially said NO to ERT,so there's no reason for her to be there!By the way,my name is Jonn,I am new to Wikipedia,but I love writing articles and helping people to know stuff!I have been really busy with this Eurovision article,because I love Eurovision!!I hope I don't bother you guyz!:)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonngait (talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elli Kokkinou?NO! 

message: I made a mistake when I was trying to put the dates for Beovizija.. I deleted the "notes" accidentally.. If somebody can re-write them.. That'd be awesome.. Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake 

message: Are they out?Or they confirmed participation?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're out, as they were in 2007. They're not listed as withdrawn because they haven't taken part since 2006. Chwech 10:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Monaco status

message: Please people: do NOT put too much details about the national preselection in the 'Notes' section, it is just for relevant artists or former participants that are taking part, you don't have to describe the whole selection process or to name all the finalists, thats what the Individual pages are for.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is also advisable to try and stick to sourced content as much as possible. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not too much details in notes 

message: I changed some things around to fit the same format as the 2007 (and rest) of the articles, and changed it to the same way we had things last year for the national final.  You have a section of the participants with the country, song, artist, language, translation, and selection date (until all is over).  Then you have another section for the details of each National Final.  When the song and singer is picked, you take out that country. I also made a section for Individual entries. I also added international broadcasts in there before this change, as well as the commentators for each country.  Please add more if you know them. Greekboy (talk) 08:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me; though it is worth trying to avoid recentism appearing in this article, by keeping information in a historical perspective and not removing details just  because it is in the past - if that occurs then the information probably should not have been added in the first place. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are talking about the national finals, then one could argue that you could easily click on the individual entrie articles to find out more information about them like they are supposed to have in them.  I kept the National Selections section because its something that was done last year.  But if people agree that it should be taken out (sine selection dates are given, and you can click on individual entries for more information) then we should take it out. Greekboy (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the national selections section should be taken out and split into the individual articles about the countries entries for 2008. Nearly everything in there is/can be talked about in the individual articles - and most of it is not important enough to stay in this article permanently except through recentism. Also, a lot of these articles on the individual countries could do with a "boost" to encourage more content to be added, giving the country articles more of a purpose by splitting-up the national selections section in this article would do that. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Sounds good.  Though each article will have a different format since their selection processes are different, which is ok.  Check out this article Greece in the Eurovision Song Contest 2007.  I was thinking something maybe like this (info wise).  It contains alot of info, references, and pictures. Greekboy (talk) 19:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, thats I would like the individual entry articles to be like. It can go into plenty of detail with the extra space. I have done some work to the individual entry articles today, including re-storing all the edit history lost due to previous deletions, which some editors might find helpful in looking at what previous versions of the articles looked like. Many of the articles still need a lot of expansion and references however. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So, there is no need to have the National Finals' section anymore...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format 

message: Do not write down the languages if you still don't know in what language the representative of that country will sing.. Not because Spain always sends songs in Spanish, means it will do the same this year (even if chances are likely to), you never know if they're going to send a song half Spanish half English.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is very likely that United Kingdom, Ireland and Malta will sing in English. Other than that, only confirmed laanguages should be used. I mean, not all countries use the same language all the time. --Robotico2 (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is very likely, yeah.. But how do u know? They will not send entries in Irish or Maltese, or I dont know in Spanish or Italian which are the new sensation.. I bet you that in 2001, nobody expected France to send a song partially in English.. Latvia sent a song in Italian where you expecting that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony0106 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have the UK ever sent a song in a language other than English? No, so I don't see the reason in removing English from the UK table section. Also, Ireland has only sung in Irish once. --Robotico2 (talk) 18:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would rather they are left blank to the song is revealed. It is very likely that the UK song will be in English - but it is still speculating, and hence arguably original research. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages 

message: There is not enough information to be added and not links to verify such information about this year's commentators of the Eurovision Song Contest, therefore I believe it should be deleted...
:I don't want to get into an editwar but why don't we just leave the Commentators section on the article. It will eventually be filled and is not a massive part of the article so isn't going to affect it hugely, so don't delete. There is no point making so much fuss over a small section and it is best if it is left alone. --Robotico2 (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the commentators section should be left in the article and filled in as more information is revealed, followed by the spokespersons section later on. Greekboy (talk) 19:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe there's probably a place for this information but it must be cited. The whole article has been tagged as not providing verifiable reliable sources. Please add some citations to support this information. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some searching for sources earlier and came up with nothing (not sure about Greece though, there may be Greek-language refs out there) so I'm moving towards removing the section for now and re-adding it when sources are available. That will probably only be a few weeks, anyway. Chwech 19:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I wouldn't disagree with that at all.  We shouldn't have non-verifiable information in the article, particularly since it seems such a bone of contention either way. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added reference for Greece.  Article lists Maggira sisters as hosts of the NF, which also means they will be this years commentators.  Thats how ERT does it for the past 10 years+ at least, never really announcing them as commentators but as hosts.  Maggira sisters were also on the morning show "Omorfos Kosmos to Proi" on Mega Channel Greece where they said they will be hosting and commentating. (as well as help write the NF)  As for the UK, don't know if there is a source for the 2008 edition yet, but Terry Wogan is at least a given. Greekboy (talk) 19:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would generally support removing uncited content, though lack of references is an article wide issue with anon and newly registered users frequently adding content that is not sourced  - and it has been difficult to keep up. It can be argued that all unsorced content should be removed, but that would mean the deletion of a lot of content at this time, which is why I added the refimprove tag. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the section should be kept, with more information being added as sources come out.  This way people will actually be on the lookout for references.Greekboy (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, there is nothing wrong with section stubs - encouraging article expansion is nearly always a good thing. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, as long as its cited its fine. The section's only going to get bigger as the months go on. Chwech 20:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete Commentators section