Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2009/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Kosovo again:

This:

That's not because host country wont allow this miserable state to participate. The logic is quite obvious:

• To participate in Eurovision you should be a permanent EBU member.(Kosovo is not)
• To join EBU you should first join ITU. (Kosovo is not,and even if it wants to join ITU,it cant because its not a member of the UN)
• As long as ITU is a part of UN, you should get a sit in UN headquaters.(Which Kosovo wont be in near future,as long as Russia and China oppose).
• To join UN you should be recognized as indepentent country by every UN Security Council members.(See point above)

Thats it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk)

Switzerland didn't join the UN until 2002, Monaco until 1993 and Germany in 1973. They all performed in the eurovison song contest before they were in the UN. So i really don't understand what you are on about? Also RTK has announced it wants to join the EBU. Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The concept that EBU won't join the EBU/UN e.t.c is not a fact. It could join the UN very soon - Serbia, China, and Russia could agree suddenly to reconise Kosovo without warning, unlikely but it is not impossible. Hence, as I have said before, it is not the job of Wikipedia editors to rule things out based on personal opinion of likelihood. Kosovo in the Eurovision Song Contest has been kept at AFD, this article is effectively it's parent article so on these grounds alone Kosovo should get a mention somewhere. The current set-up giving context to the current situation of Kosovo is a good compromise. It is appropriately sourced and encyclopaedic, which is what is ultimately the important thing. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Being a member of ITU isn't a requisite for being part of EBU, as Switzerland until 2002. The requisite is being part of the zone defined by ITU... and that is only a geographical criteria, not political. Serbia, Russia, China and any other country could oppose Kosovar membership, but they won't change their physical location and Kosovo is within the zone defined by ITU. Of course, if EBU then accept RTK as a full member is other thing. --B1mbo (talk) 04:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I dont think that Russia and China agree to see Kosovo in a Eurovision Song Contest,and Serbia just not to mention.They recalled its ambasaddors from overseas,and I just cant imagine Serbia to give up that easily.

You are saying:Being a member of ITU isn't a requisite for being part of EBU, as Switzerland until 2002.

Im saying that noone of the UN Security Council OPPOSED to Switzerland being a part of the UN,while in the Kosovo issue there are at least 10 countries that OPPOSE.The problem with Israel is that Israel is recognized by ALL UN security council members,and therefore Russia,USA,China,France,and the UK recognised it,but:Israel has no diplomatic relations with 34 countries. It is not recognized by Iran and the partially recognized Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.So noone oppose for Israel being a member of EBU,because already Isral is recognised by all security council members.

The issue with Kosovo is a bit more complex.While noone opposes Israel to be independent,there are a lot who oppose to see Kosovo in the ESC.Same goes with Palestine:Palestine is recognized as a proposed state by 96 UN member states and by the Holy See, and its missions have diplomatic or special status in 12 other countries. It is not recognized by Israel, the United States, the EU, most Western European and Latin American countries, and the UN, among others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 10:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

For the record according to this map: Image:CountriesRecognizingKosovo.png, the United States does reconise Kosovo. The EU cannot reconise Kosovo as it does not currently have the legal capacity to reconise countries - it is up to member states to do so, and at present 20 out of 27 EU members reconise Kosovo. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

USA and mostly EU do recognise Kosovo.But USA is one of the 5 members of UN that have a power to VETO any decision.Russia and China used VETO so they do not recognise Kosovo as independent,so that makes USA,France,UK (three members of the UN that recognise Kosovo) and two (Russia and China) that do not recognise.If Kosovo wants to join EBU,Kosovo have to be recognised by EVERY UN member that has a VETO POWER (Kosovo is not recognsied by (China and Russia) all 5 of them,and I dont think that will happen soon).I think EBU will look this into consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

San Marino

Ok, San Marino is interested to take part to ESC despite the bad performance of 2008, but their status is still unknown, it could be better to put a space called "uncertain status"--87.6.183.92 (talk) 10:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeh Ok. But we needed sources to back up their uncertainty Ijanderson977 (talk) 23:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

in the second source, it's written: "The broadcaster will take the final decision later this year."--79.27.176.189 (talk) 11:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

None of the sources are reliable. The first one says that Little Tony wants to represent San Marino next year but Little Tony is not the Head of the Sanmarinese delegation nor the President of the broadcaster who decide whether San Marino will participate or no. The second source only says that the ``Minister of Youth´´ is hoping to see San Marino next year and at the end it clearly states ``The broadcaster will take the final decision later this year.´´ That means that they are still not sure about participating thus cannot be listed as a confirmed participant. Tony0106 (talk) 05:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Little Tony *was* the head of the Sanmarinese jury, so I suppose he does have some pull with SMRTV. But yes, you're right, SMRTV makes the final decision (but the quotes seem to indicate they want to go, but might pull out for financial reasons.) 149.79.35.227 (talk) 19:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

financial reasons? but it's a small TV, NOT BBC! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.31.37.46 (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Change Map colours please

I think the Maps of Eurovision should stick with the same colours, this new map is way too bright and how can you have blue to denote a ´´possible´´ withdrawal?? I think the colours of the Map should stay in the shades of green and we should NOT put any possible debuts/returns. Only the confirmed participants that is why I've decided to remove the map. Thanks. Tony0106 (talk) 04:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well what colours do you suggest? Ijanderson977 (talk) 10:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

x200, like so? Ijanderson977 (talk) 10:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

While I have nothing against changing the colours - I do not see any reason why the current map needs to be removed. A new version can just be uploaded over the old version on Commons. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be removed because there's no need to show possible returns, debuts or withdrawals on the map but only the confirmed participants. Who puts a withdrawal in dark blue?? 190.39.66.188 (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but is that really such a serious problem that it justifies total removal? However, the colour blue should be avoided for countries if possible as it is associated with ocean, hence can cause confusion. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Having a problem with the colors of the map does not warrant its removal; the colors chosen were an editor's choice. Do you have a problem with the color blue? The map simply shows the sourced information from the sections above it. When the contest gets closer and the participants become clear, the map will look a lot like it did last year. Grk1011 (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I never said that that the choice of colours justified map removal. I do not have a personal problem with the colour blue (note one user box on my user page) - that was just a suggestion and as this is a wiki, things can be changed. As I have said before, what was done last year does not always mean should be done this year. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I was supporting you lol. The other user said "Who puts a withdrawal in dark blue??", but i didnt see how that meant that the map needed to be removed. I have no problem with debuts, withdrawals and stuff like that on the map. Grk1011 (talk) 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see! I don't have problems with withdrawals, debuts, and returns on the map either; seems perfectly helpful to me and nobody else seems to be against it either. Well I think the colour issue is quite trivial really, as long as there is a key and most people can work out what is land and what is not. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

On a side not since Blue was mentioned, if I remember correctly from past maps, I don't think any shade of blue is allowed for countries, since blue represents water.Greekboy (talk) 19:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, somebody said that last year as well which is why I brought it up. As I have said I don't think it is that important, but if that is the case last years map is also going to have to be changed as it has blue as well for countries. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Lets have a vote. What colour for each section.

• Confirmed participants

• Possible returns

• Possible debuts

• Possible withdrawals

• Countries that have participated in the past but didn't this year

So suggest which colour should be used Ijanderson977 (talk) 14:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the current colours are all right, the only suggestion I would make is changing the possible withdrawals to maybe red due to the issues described above. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed participants - green means go

Possible returns - as is

Possible debuts - as is

Possible withdrawals - yellow

Countries that have participated in the past but didn't this year - red means stop

Thats my idea. Grk1011 (talk) 18:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I still believe the sections of Possible returns/debuts/withdrawals should be removed from the map. Specially the possible ``returns´´ because there is alot of speculation on that one. Italy had been shade and we know there are very slim chances that Italy would not compete next year. My suggestion for colours are:

Confirmed Participants: Dark Green

Possible returns: If not removed, then Medium Green

Possible debuts: If not removed, Teal

Possible withdrawals: Light Red (blue is never a colour to denote a withdrawal. By the way, blue is usually not used over countries because blue represents the water.

The rest: Grey as it is Tony0106 (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the map because it includes Italy as a possible participant and it isnt. Tony0106 (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

No need to remove it. Just remove italy from the map. Ijanderson977 (talk) 22:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Ive made a compromise of everyones suggestions. Have a look at the map. Let me know if you radically disagree. Ijanderson977 (talk) 23:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks good except for the blue. I think we have all decided that it is easily confused with water (tho water is white on the map) how about cyan or magenta? Grk1011 (talk) 01:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Ill change it to cyan then :-) Ijanderson977 (talk) 08:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The new colours look good to me. Camaron2 | Chris (talk) 09:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the colours are still way too bright and I don't know but maybe the format of the map is not the same as the maps from the previous years. The user (Ijanderson977) is doing whatever he wants without taking into account other opinions. The editers should keep on voting on what colours they prefer. The problem here is that the map is totally different from those of the other articles, even the angle is different. Tony0106 (talk) 16:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

As already said the map of previous years may have to be changed - eventually one map for all Eurovision Song Contest's can be created with one uploaded for each year perhaps. Other opinions seem to be taken into account to me - the current colours are based on suggestions above. I also think it needs to be pointed out that Wikipedia uses consensus over voting, I personally think the current colours are fine. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Are they really?? Only one person suggested yellow and it was for the ``withdrawals´´ and he put them for the possible debuts. Yes a standard map should be made for Eurovision. The angle and the colours of this map are all wrong. Tony0106 (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I agree with the suggestion for yellow so that makes two. Ijanderson977 said he was compromising, and am afraid if this is going to go anywhere we are all going to have to be prepared to do the same. I really do not see what is wrong with the current colours, they are not that strong and brightness varies through settings of the computer monitor and hence is difficult to control. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm fine with the map the way it is. If you look at maps from past years they show completely different information (points awarded i believe). All of us have been open to a compromise and are satisfied with the map the way it is now except for you. Instead of offering your idea, you just criticized the actions and ideas of others. How would you like it to be done? Also its a 2D map so how could there be a different angle? Grk1011 (talk) 19:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the green colour is horrible. I'm not exaggerating when I say it hurt my eyes. Can't we find a less lurid shade of green to use? AnthonyUK (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Belgium

Belgium is confirmed country for next year contest,because now the Wallon (French speaking) TV broadcaster RTBF is in charge to select the participant.They wont withdraw.So do we have to wait to have a source or? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

May I see that the source for the Belgian participation is now incorrect because the article goes about a competition on belgovision and visitors of the site can give names who thy want to represent belgium and then belgovision will select one BUT that person will not certainly represent us;- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.57.60 (talk) 08:03, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Competing sources

According to the edit history two sources seem to be competing with each other in this article:

[1]: Oikitimes saying: 'Moscow confirmed as Eurovision 2009 host city'

[2]: European Broadcasting Union saying: 'Media and fans now speculate whether the honour of hosting the 54th Eurovision Song Contest will go to Saint Petersburg, or capital Moscow. A decision on the Host City is expected to be made in the next couple of months.'

Oikitimes appears to be the only source which says it is Moscow, I have not found anything from the EBU, ESCToday, or Channel One Russia confirming Moscow is the host. Both sources are from around the same time and are both rather at odds at each other. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Withdraw?

San Marino, correctly, will decide later this year if they will compete, but I wouldn't put it into a possible withdraw, but as uncertain status!--79.27.176.189 (talk) 13:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

thats why its as possible withdraw. They haven't confirmed any status yet. So when they do, we will mention its status. Ijanderson977 (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

uncertain status would include pretty much every country whose participation is unclear. possible withdrawal is the best way as of now. Grk1011 (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

According to the source, San Marino just says they will evaluate the situation and that they will announce in future if they stay or withdraw. Essentially the same that other countries are doing but they aren't saying it in an interview. At these moment, San Marino is 50% withdrawing, 50% staying... that's why I don't think they should be listed as "Possible withdrawals". Yes, it's possible, just like it's possible that Serbia or Sweden could withdraw anytime from here to ESC 2009. San Marino should stay in other category, maybe Undecided or something like that... ----B1mbo (talk) 02:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with B1mbo, San Marino status is uncertain, l'et's say 60%-40% because the interest in the competition, despite the 50% holded by RAI, is strong!--79.37.31.135 (talk) 14:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo once again

Regarding Kosovo future of participating in the contest:I suggest all of you to look into the EBU website,which clearly says about the requirements needed to be EBU member.That is the only trustworthy source that we have at the moment:

The conditions for active membership of the EBU are laid down in Article 3§3 of the Union's Statutes, which reads as follows:

"Active membership of the EBU is open to broadcasting organizations or groups of such organizations from:

a member country of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) situated in the European Broadcasting Area as defined by the Radio Regulations annexed to the International Telecommunication Convention, or a member country of the Council of Europe which is situated outside the European Broadcasting Area (We all know this because it was previously mentioned).

But this:

which provide in that country, with the authorization of the competent authorities, a broadcasting service of national character and importance, and which furthermore prove that they fulfil all the conditions set out below:

(a) virtually all of the national radio and/or television households are in a position and technically equipped to receive the entirety of their major radio and/or television programme service with satisfactory technical quality;

(b) they are under an obligation to, and actually do, provide varied and balanced programming for all sections of the population, including programmes catering for special/minority interests of various sections of the public, irrespective of the ratio of programme cost to audience;

(c) they actually produce and/or commission at their own cost and under their own editorial control a substantial proportion of the programmes broadcast;

(d) they are not linked to a sports rights agency which engages in the acquisition of European television rights in competition with the EBU."

But PAY ATTENTION to this:

Admission procedure: Applicants MUST PROVE that they meet all the membership criteria, by submitting a point-by-point application on a form which is available (in English or French) from the EBU Legal and Public Affairs Department.

There are two membership cycles per year, the deadlines for complete applications being 31 January and 31 July. The applications are then processed and decided upon by the appropriate EBU bodies.

Membership fee and entrance fee: Active Members of the EBU pay an annual membership fee which is calculated on the basis of their operating expenditure.

New active Members are required to pay a one-off entrance fee. It takes account of the applicant's financial capacities and the value which EBU membership represents for it, but is normally the equivalent of three times the applicant's first annual membership fee.

And by the way,I dont think that the following is a greneal research,because all these informations are ON EBU website,which accepts the EBU members.Another thing which I found on the EBU website and is very interesting is:

2. National character and importance "National character and importance" means that the nature of the service provided is national, as opposed to transnational, regional or local. Where in a country there are two or more linguistic areas, this criterion refers individually to each such area. Where a given service can be regarded as aimed at two or more countries at the same time, even if it is intended primarily for the broadcaster's own country, it does not meet the requirement of national character; targeting of news, the content of advertising and the existence of programme windows for foreign audiences will be the main indicators of this.

Programmes must be produced for the national audience, reflecting the interests and concerns of society at large as well as, more specifically, the variety of national culture (national writers and performers; important anniversaries; cultural events).

You can read all this here in more detail:

http://www.ebu.ch/en/ebu_members/admission/index.php

I dont think that Kosovo fullfils all those requirements,so I suggest we better take them out.Once again,I dont consider this as general research,because all of this is on the EBU website,that makes the rules/requirements for being a EBU member and for entering the contest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 04:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Turkey

Turkey is confirmed participant by the TRT:The Turkish newspaper Huriyet wrote the following (English translation): According to Hurriyet, Trt has offered Hepsi to participate in eurovision song contest next year.

Source about this: www.hepsikolik.com/blog/hepsi-haberleri/grup-hepsi-kizlari-hurriyet-gazetesi-roportajini-okuyun.htm

More sources:Official source: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/magazin/anasayfa/8007831.asp?m=1 http://blueeangel.blogspot.com/2008/05/hepsi-eurovision-yolunda-mi.html The last one is from newspaper as well.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk)

Armenia

In a statement released on public tv of armenia,the television said the foolowing:

26 of May, 2008 "Qele, Qele" reached final on May 20th, 2008 in Belgrade with the second position in the queque. Final of the Eurovision Song Contest has taken place on May 24th, 2008 and Armenian entry has made it to TOP-5, Sirusho brought 4th place in the Final. The special award from press has been given to Sirusho in Euroclub during the after-party. AMPTV thanks EBU, RTS and all people working hard for making the idea of the "Confluence of Sound" possible. Congratulations Russia!

That says more than enough that they will participate in the next years contest.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk)

Where does it say that Armenia will participate next year? Aecis^Brievenbus 10:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

It says on this source:http://www.oikotimes.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3679 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 12:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It says that System of a Down is interested in taking part for Armenia, it doesn't say anywhere that Armenia has confirmed taking part. Aecis^Brievenbus 14:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Greece,Cyprus,Azerbaijan,Ireland,Turkey,Hungary

All those countries are confirmed participants,therefore please do not remove it.They are good sources:

Greece read more here:http://www.esctime.com/news/884 Cyprus read more here:http://www.oikotimes.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3561 Azerbaijan is properly sourced:http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=50566 Ireland:http://www.allkindsofeverything.ie/IrishNews.htm particularly thhe eighth paragraph starting with:

Meanwhile as Ireland tries to lick its wounds for the second successive year, bookmakers Paddy Power have opened a book on who is likely to sing the Irish Eurovision entry in Russia in 2009. The early favourite is Limerick girl Leanne Moore, who won the sixth series of "You're A Star" in March. Other more familiar names in the frame are two time winner Johnny Logan and also Niamh Kavanagh who called in the Irish votes on Saturday night. Nadine Coyle currently with Girls Aloud and recently reformed Boyzone are also mentioned as potentially possiblities, while the idea of another puppet act; Podge and Rodge, who have expressed interest in Eurovision would be likely to cause even more controversy than Dustin.

Hungary is also confirmed: http://www.eschungary.hu/news/2008/belgrad2008_react.html

Saying "this is a good source" does not make it a good source. The Irish website mentioned that a bookmaker was taking odds on the next entrant, it did not say that there was a confirmed entry. The same is true for Hungary. AnthonyUK (talk) 17:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I added that source for Hungary because I read that: There are a lot of rumours about the Hungarian participation in the ESC 2009 but we can hear more positive reactions about Eurovision.So we can at least confirm that they are not disappointed,so they wont withdraw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis (talk • contribs) 13:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I agree with you that Hungary and Ireland will almost certainly enter next year. But to include them as "confirmed participants" we need the TV station (or whoever decides on whether to enter) to confirm participation. Once that happens, then we can cite that as a source. There's no rush. AnthonyUK (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

None of the links posted for Azerbaijan/Cyprus/Greece/Hungary confirm participation or come from the words of official broadcaster regarding participation

The Azerbaijan's source was just an interview from the 2008 participants and they just talk about some singers who might be interested in entering the 2009 contest.

Both the Cyprus' and Greece's source were just speculation from Oikotimes over who will possibly represent those countries next year.

The Hungary link was just an opinion article on the results of the Hungerian entry last year. It didn't even mention anything about Eurovision 2009 at all.

Due to the reasons mentioned above all those links and countries were removed from the Confirmed Participants. Tony0106 (talk) 02:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Possible withdrawals / Uncertain participations

Saying uncertain is the same as saying possible, because there are chances that it could happen or no. An uncertain participation from Andorra, Poland and San Marino IS a 'possible withdrawal' because they participated in the 2008 edition and they are going to decide whether they will compete (stay) or not (withdraw). If you call them uncertain participations then that of Austria and Slovakia are also uncertain participations so there is no point in dividing them to possible returns because of that I think we should stick with possible withdrawals for Poland and San Marino and possible returns for Austria and Slovakia. Tony0106 (talk) 19:48, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

You can take Andorra out of the possible withdrawls. They are not withdrawing. I have email clarification from Creu Rosell (HoD Andorra) stating she doesn't know where this information has come from. She has been completely misquoted. The email I have from her says "I don't know where you have seen that. The Eurovision project will be starting again next September." If whoever controls this article wants the email as proof then I can forward it on, but as I said earlier, Andorra have no plans to withdraw from the festival. Just having their name on screen for 3 minutes is the goal. (81.132.136.139 (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC))

That was me by the way. (CKnight16 (talk) 16:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC))

Who added Romania as a withdrawl?Its not sourced,so we better take that out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 00:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I can not find the source saying Louxenbourg will not participate. It takes me to the main page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.45.111.68 (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. The link doesn't work. Googling "luxembourg no interest site:esctoday.com" [3] found the link, but it doesn't work there either. ESCtoday must have taken down the story, which makes me think that it should probably be removed from here too. Chwech 20:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Luxembourg:http://www.oikotimes.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3618 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 01:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Luxembourg article works from here, and confirms that LUX will not participate in 2009, but for some reason doesn't work on the main page? But check the link from here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.26.94.226 (talk) 05:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Oikotimes link works fine for me, that could be used. Chwech 11:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, now oikotimes works! but when i added as a source it was removed ¬¬ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.45.111.68 (talk) 23:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Map removed due to unreliable sources

I've removed the map because it included Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary and Turkey as confirmed participants and they are not. Azerbaijan, Greece and Turkey are very likely to compete next year but if their broadcaster or an official source haven't confirmed their participation we cannot confirm them or put them in the map. There are big chances that Hungary might withdraw because of the poor result they got this year and low viewing rates. Cyprus have been a regular participant since the 1980s but there are chances that they could withdraw.

For all those editing the map check for the references before putting something on that map. I cannot edit it because I don't have the program on my computer that's why I have removed it. Tony0106 (talk) 02:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

That was a bit drastic, you could've asked someone to edit the map before removing it completly. But i agree with the removal of the above countries for the time being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.27.205.243 (talk) 04:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I dont think a map is even needed yet. I would just say to wait until the EBU confirms the participants in the fall. Greekboy (talk) 05:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Agree though I don't think a map of participating countries is even necessary, a map like Image:Eurovision 2008 map.svg could be added after the final, though the colour on this map is bad imo, as it's almost impossible to see where a team finished without using a graphics editor and checking the colour codes — chandler — 05:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do not think the map is needed either. Tony0106 (talk) 09:31, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of whether the map is needed or not you need to stop taking it out. A few days ago you said it needed to come out because you didn't like the color scheme. The sequence of events is discuss then take action. Grk1011 (talk) 13:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

If the map is incorrect, get some to change it. Don't delete it. That just downgrades the quality of the article even more. If the map needs changing, I'll update it. Please don't delete. Ijanderson977 (talk) 15:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

But the point is, that you do not need a map this early on if you are waiting for firm confirmations. If you do include one, I would put all the participants from the previous years as "likely participants" until they are confirmed of NO participation. The map only really needs "Countries likely participating going to the semi final" and "Countries going to the final". Only 2 colors really. No "countries that can" or any of that stuff. But again, I personally would wait until the fall to get firm confirmation about everything before adding a map. Greekboy (talk) 20:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Im sick of people complaining that they haven't got software on their computer to edit the image. Yes you do, I use windows paint. Ever PC has that. Ijanderson977 (talk) 12:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Some people might have Macintosh, but I think learning how to use it might be more an issue - past experiences have taught me Microsoft Paint is not the most complex software but can be very tedious to get to do what you want it to do! I could probably update it now knowing what software is used. Anyway, even if the map is not kept here for now it is still going to exist on Commons, I have just created a linked category for Eurovision 2009 images and a gallery can be added once there are more. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo Again

I've removed the sentence saying that RTS (Serbia) will withdraw if Kosovo participates because there wasn't even a source confirming that. I've also removed the sentence saying that a desicion will reach by the end of the year because there was no source. Lastly, I've removed the sentence which said that RTK must have broadcasting plans in accordance with the EBU because that wasn't necessary. Every broadcaster must do that. Is not a special requisite with the Kosovan broadcaster. If we didnt put and discuss every rule of ..how to become an active EBU member.. with Azerbaijan last year. Why should we do it now? Tony0106 (talk) 03:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I contacted the Serbian Television and im waiting for reply on that question.The members of the official forum of the Eurovision Song Contest say that RTS have looked at the situation very closely,but I guess if Kosovo HAS A CHANCE to go to Eurovision they will object.Tony,we know that every broadcaster must do that,but does Kosovo do that?Does it provide equal programming for all members for populations.I think the membreship will fail exactly for this component.The Serbs are clear-they do live in terrible conditions.All those rules are stated on the EBU website.And at the end of the discussion that EBU organisation makes all the rules for being a member and for entering the contest.AZTV didnt get the membership due to their close relationship with the government.I guess we should wait and see,what will happen in the future,so far we have only one source (from RTK) they want to join EBU,but nothing comes out of EBU,not a response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 05:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Norway

Someone please tell me how "Norway says no to schlagers" can be a confirmation of Norway participating next year. Besides, it's a broken link. - Jetro (talk) 01:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Map

There are no reliable source about Italy, can you remove it form the map please??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.31.36.60 (talk) 21:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

and it could be better to separate possible withrawals and non-participating--87.6.179.52 (talk) 22:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm taking the map out. Its not up to date and changes to quickly to be helpful. Its turning into a burden especially since we cant decide who falls into which category. Grk1011 (talk) 22:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree. We should wait until there is confirmed list from the EBU of the participants to put up a map. Right now it is not needed, and is very confusing. Greekboy (talk) 22:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Romania and Switzerland

Confirmed their participation-they also have reliable sources.Please do not remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 11:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Switzerland does because the broadcaster published the rules for the upcoming national selection. On the other hand, the source for Romania clearly states ``Romania did not confirm participation for the following contest´´ there's no need to made anymore comments about it. Furthermore Moldova was also removed from the list because it was just an article talking about a possible entrant for Moldova, nothing about rules of the next national selection, no confirmation, just rumours again. Thanks. 201.248.81.43 (talk) 04:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Judging by that then, we should remove Spain too as it is just one person who wants to enter for Spain, and it isn't confirmation as far as I know.--Robotico2 (talk) 07:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with removing Spain, the source given is not much of a conformation. Camaron | Chris (talk) 09:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)