Talk:ABU Radio Song Festival 2012/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

TV Participants

Quick opinion - 10, 12 or 13 now? I go for 10, as these are confirmed with entrants. 12 were in preliminary list, but SBS was added since, meaning either someone dropped out, or? I'm very open on this, as anyway it will be brought to real figure in a month. Wesley? Ruslanovich (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused with this too. Sources show 10, yet there are sources used also from ESCKaz that state 13. Perhaps ESCKaz have got themselves confused too!? I'm happy to leave it as it is now, as the lead and infobox does state "thirteen so far", and as is known with Eurovision by Year article, the list of "so far" participants can change at any given time. There is no template that I know of which we could use to stipulate that the lists are subject to change at any time. Could do with one though. Wesley Mouse 19:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Article correction proposals

Seeing as the 3O debate above has reached some sort of mutual conclusion, perhaps we can now proceed to brainstorming ideas on what how this article should be written. I'll section this thread based on the article sections. Bear in mind the article needs to comply with manual of style as agreed at the recent RFC summary. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• The main aim is to try and write the article to a high standard, so that we can maintain our recent GA-class trend on Contest by Year articles. So it would be a logical idea to familiarise with project scope, and even use the GA-class article Eurovision Song Contest 2012 as an example idea. Wesley Mouse 19:45, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Lead

The Lead needs to summarise what is written in the entire article. So this will be determined upon what the others sections will include. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Fine with the current lead, except using the word "annual" before it is confirmed for sure whether Radio Festival is annual or biennial.Ruslanovich (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

We know the TV version is annual. The radio version is inaugural, but inaugural doesn't mean biennial. The word inaugural doesn't even have any relevance to chronological context. See definition of inaugural for details. Wesley Mouse 19:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I have already given the link stating it is biennial.Ruslanovich (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. We would word that into the format section then primarily and in expansive detail. The lead like I said, will get worked upon and reflect what is in the main article. We can't really decide on the lead yet until we know what is happening with the rest of the article first. Can we come back to this section after then? Wesley Mouse 19:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

Infobox is in accordance to current style of infoboxes agreed and used by WP:ESC. No alterations required at this present time. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I propose to edit the Infobox title from Asiavision to something else, as Asiavision is partly confusing. Otherwise, this can be developed on a later date when more information is available. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The template name is fine, doesn't need to be changed. It needs to be something short and memorable. The current one was agreed upon, so no need to change. Wesley Mouse 19:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

History

• Start discussion here.

Backing the proposed wording by Frankie. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

If you can remember where the wording is that Frankie wrote, then feel free to add it to this article. I ain't stopping you there. Wesley Mouse 20:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• The Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union (ABU) had already ran an international song contest for it's members inspired by the Eurovision Song Contest in 1985-1987, called the ABU Popular Song Contest, with 14 countries of Asia-Pacific region competing. The show had a similar concept to the current festivals with winners being chosen by a professional jury. South Korea, New Zealand and Australia celebrated victories in this competition. In 1989-1991 ABU co-produced the ABU Golden Kite World Song Festival in Malaysia with participation of Asia-Pacific countries, as well as Yugoslavia and Finland.

In 2008, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) proposed a partnership with ABU on the establishment of an Asiavision Song Contest, however these talks didn't produce any result, and in September 2008 it was announced that the Eurovision Song Contest format for Asian production had been sold to a private company from Singapore, Asiavision Pte. Ltd.. The original name intended for that event was Asiavision Song Contest, but it was later changed to Our Sound - The Asia-Pacific Song Contest following a request from the ABU, who uses the Asiavision name for their news exchange service. Initially, the contest (which was supposed to be a two program live broadcast TV show with public voting) was set to premiere in 2009, but it was later rescheduled for March 2010 in Macao and then for November 2010 in Mumbai, at the end being postponed indefinitely "due to the ongoing issues between the organizers and EBU".

Shortly before launching the ABU Song Festivals, the ABU had been considering the possibility to organize the ABU ASEAN TV Song Festival in Thailand. Historically, ASEAN song contests had been organized in periods between 1981 and 1997, however since 2011 the ASEAN Festival had been organized between local Radio stations as Bintang Radio ASEAN.

In November 2011, the ABU announced that they would organize it's own TV and Radio Song Festivals to take place in Seoul, the South Korean capital, in time with 49th General Assembly in October 2012. The name Asiavision Song Contest was initially mentioned as a possibility, but they were later officially titled ABU TV Song Festival and ABU Radio Song Festival. According to the ABU, the deadline for participation applications was 18 May 2012.

• This ends proposal by Frankie, just a small note: the last phrase "According to the ABU, the deadline for participation applications was 18 May 2012" applies only for a TV contest, not to the Radio contest, so this should be clarified in this sentence adding "...applications for ABU TV Song Contest was...". As per Radio Contest, I was unable to find the entering deadline, but the submissions deadline was the end of July as per this. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Well then, add it to the article. As there have been that many alterations made since your original edits, it will be impossible to revert everything back while keeping those newer edits in tact. It will mean writing from scratch as if it was a new edit contribution. Wesley Mouse 20:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Done together with minor alterations in the article - feel free to review them and debate if not agreed. Currently the major point is Format section, can you please review it? Ruslanovich (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I did have a look at it shortly after you made the alterations (I have this on my watchlist remember lol). It is a better improvement from the original edit a few days ago. Well done! I had to change the table though for the Radio Contest. You placed two flags for the same participant Vanuatu/Australia. This would confuse the general reader into thinking the singer was representing two nations with the same song. Instead, I've removed the Australian flag, and placed a footnote which explains to the reader that even though its listed as Vanuatu, the artist is listed as both Vanuatu/Australia on the official site, due to Vanuatu's national broadcaster being of Australian origin. That should clear things up hopefully. One vital point you need to remember here though, the article has to be written in a manner so that even the most dumbest of person would understand what is going on - not everyone is a fan of these festivals so won't be too familiar how they operate etc. This is how we came about the RfC etc, and going off that we ended up with the project's first Good Article in terms of a "by year" article. That alone has set a standard to aim for, as Wikipedia is all about writing good articles which may in turn become feature articles. Wesley Mouse 12:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Vanuatu is kind of issue. With singer being nominated by Australian broadcaster (Radio Australia) and being mentioned as solely Australian representative on a main ABU site, may be it would be appropriate to list him as primarily Australian here too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruslanovich (talk • contribs) 15:53, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't. Some sources have him listed as Vanuatu - which is why I have placed the footnote next to Vanuatu and added a prose explanation to clear up any confusion. This is the preferred method per MOS. We cannot add a flag into the prose as this violates MOS too (apparently). The participant is from Vanuatu, he is representing Vanuatu, its just Vanuatu are for whatever reasons using an Australian Broadcaster, hence why the ABU have listed as Vanuatu/Australia. Wesley Mouse 16:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

[Another site] lists him solely as Australian entrant. I think we have a different thing here: Australian broadcaster is entering Australian citizen who currently lives in Vanuatu. Like, for example in Eurovision Swiss broadcaster is entering Estonian group Vanilla Ninja. I think the country of broadcaster has to have priority, but it is not a major issue anyway - it seems a bit of mix-up in ABU too. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:05, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

ABU have confused matters indeed. But the current method of footnoting this matter allows us to cover the issue better and provide an explanation to readers who are not fully aware of the event. Wesley Mouse 10:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Location

Location section is in accordance to current style as agreed at ProjectEurovision RFC. No alterations required at this present time. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Format

• Start discussion here.

As proposed above. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm off for today, can you please review the "Proposed wording for Format section" above and include it to the article. Feel free to make changes/alterations, if needed we will discuss it later. Thanks a lot for your assistance. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Will need to think about that one a little more. Not 100% sure if we are allowed to number-point items within a prose, per WP:MOS. Will read up on MOS and get back to you on that. I'm off tomorrow (yes Paralympic duties again), so we can discuss the format prose on Monday if you like. Wesley Mouse 15:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Feel also free to rewrite it as long as it clearly shows the differences between the festivals, otherwise, the article looks a bit confusing now. Ruslanovich (talk) 15:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Participating countries

Participating countries could do with a prose, with the tables of participants placed under their respective headers (as currently formatted). This too would be in accordance to current style as agreed at ProjectEurovision RFC. Any further suggestions are greatly welcomed. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The only question is whether we should also add countries that were in preliminary list but have withdrawn since somewhere (as Thailand, China for Radio Festival)? Otherwise, it is fine. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

You could always see ESC 1996 page to provide examples on how to handle the preliminary rounds. Although, I should point out, that article has yet to be reformatted into the new style. I started to get through them all, but due to Olympic obligations, have had to put the rollout of the new layout style on hold for now. Wesley Mouse 19:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I mean different thing. When the country is in preliminary list, but is withdrawing since then. As the latest preliminary list that had such a confusion I can get on my mind was of JESC 2008 - which featured Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Israel, which have withdrawn since then without actually taking part. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah I know what you mean now. They get listed under a section "Other countries" to which we would list such countries that intended to participate but then later changed their minds. See ESC 2013, that has a list of "other countries". Wesley Mouse 19:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

International broadcasts

This section is also in accordance to current style as agreed at ProjectEurovision RFC. No further alterations required, apart from listing (and sourcing) commentators next to the respective nation once details are available. Wesley Mouse 19:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

It has to be noted that the participating broadcasters have no obligation to air the competition (understandably, for example, there is no interest to air it for the relegated broadcasters like India or Kyrgyzstan). At the same time, all ABU members, even not participating will be invited to broadcast the show. So compared to Eurovision, here two sections are needed: Participating Broadcasters, and Broadcasters airing the event (whatever title is). The participating broadcasters are known now, but the ones airing the show can be added in only after specific confirmation that they are doing so. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ahh allow me to explain this section better for you Ruslan. Even on Eurovision by Year articles, all broadcasters get listed regardless of participation or not. If they broadcast it, they get listed. These lists get updated as and when details become readily available. Take a look at Eurovision 2012 article; there are non-participating broadcasters from Australia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan on there; and yet they never participated. I am aware that you have only just joined English Wikipedia, but it may be worthwhile checking out the project page to familiarise yourself with the scope to save on situations like this. Wesley Mouse 19:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Then the current list of international broadcasts should be empty. No broadcasters have actually confirmed airing the shows. Please understand the difference: in Eurovision countries are obliged to air the show, in ABU Contests they are not, and may take this decision only after the show ended - based on quality of production and their result in it. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ruslan, you may be getting confused here. Eurovision countries are obliged to broadcast the grand final; but the semi-finals are different, they only need to air the one which they are participating in. Yet, even before the contest has aired, the articles still get listed with such details as long as there are sources. So far ESCKaz (a source which you have referenced to once) has a list of confirmed participants, along with their respective national broadcaster. So we are to assume for now that they will broadcast and list them accordingly, until details are released to state differently - in which case we can then remove them from the list. Wesley Mouse 19:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Again, in Eurovision you can assume country will be broadcasting the final, because it is obligation. I do not see the reason to assume the same here, especially as the festival will be aired deferred everywhere. I strictly propose not to include any country before they have actually confirmed the date of the broadcast of the event in the country. You should understand, that not everything that works with Eurovision is the same here. In my opinion it is better to have two separate paragraphs: participating broadcasters, and Broadcast of the show - with airing date. Ruslanovich (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

But your proposal is deviating away from what has been agreed by consensus through a lengthy RFC debate. I'm not bothered either way, but its the others you also need to think about. So on that basis I personally will stick with what a consensus decided. Wesley Mouse 20:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Or alternatively, may be it is be better to incorporate Participating broadcasters to the Participants list, so that it is clear which Malaysian entry is submitted by which broadcaster for example. Currently, there is no such information on the page. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

1. We don't assume based on "well they broadcast last time, so will do this time" scenario. We list based on sources. You supplied the ESCKaz source, that has a list of national broadcasters next to the confirmed participants, so based on that we can say they will broadcast for now, and remove any at a later date if sources show they didn't broadcast it.
2. We cannot list them into the participation tables - that idea has been tested once and it looked a mess and caused issues with article layout. If it ain't broken, don't fix it! That's my motto. Wesley Mouse 20:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Then this has to be mentioned elsewhere. It is important information, which broadcaster is behind which entry - again one country may have several entries by different broadcasters, something not happening with Eurovision and a separate solution for ABU pages is required. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

We simply can't stick to "RfC on the article layout of Eurovision Song Contest by year articles" as this isn't Eurovision by year article. A different event which may require some alterations. I'm OK with having this list before contest - but having in mind it may mislead some people searching for information on the dates of broadcast in Wikipedia. This is never an issue with Eurovision as MOST of the countries air show live, and it is extraordinary case when it isn't happening in some country. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Erm slow down, no need for that attitude please. The RfC wasn't just for Eurovision by Year article. As you wasn't present at the RfC, you wouldn't have know that the RfC was also regarding ALL '... by Year' articles under ProjectEurovision scope, including JESC, EDC, EYM, ESC. So this article which is a "by year" article will fall under the same RfC. Sorry if you don't understand that, but nothing I can do I'm afraid. Wesley Mouse 20:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Also the lists never include "broadcasting time" for the respective channels, so they wouldn't mislead readers. Australia always defer broadcasting of Eurovision, they don't broadcast it as a live event - yet they are also listed with the other countries who have broadcast the event. Wesley Mouse 20:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Simply because you don't need this for ESC articles. Broadcasting time is MOSTLY the same. In JESC there are mentions when for example Australia broadcasts contest in delay on New Year or whenever, see again JESC 2008 for example. In ABU we simply have no idea yet when most of countries will decide to air it. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

"This RfC will attempt to address what sections and content should normally be included in Eurovision Song Contest by year articles, such as Eurovision Song Contest 2010, Eurovision Song Contest 2010 and so on. CT Cooper · talk 12:26, 29 June 2012 (UTC)" In no way, this can be fully reflected on ABU Festivals articles, being a very different events from Eurovision. This is why we're discussing it here without applying directly. I'm fine with currently doing this section your proposed way, but I kindly ask for this topic to remain here as not solved, before a consensus is reached here. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

As I had mentioned above, some articles on ESC and JESC have yet to be reformatted into the new layout. JESC ones in particular haven't been reformatted yet, so I wouldn't use those as an example. If you need to check on examples of what I mean, see Eurovision articles between 1956 - 1975; 2001; 2012; and 2013. Wesley Mouse 20:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at Eurovision Song Contest 2012#Results (which is the only by year article to be promoted to Good Article status) , each of the semi-final, final tables has a small prose. That is where we mention anything about deferred broadcasting, Albania deferred this year, and it was mentioned there. For broadcasters that are not participating, such as Australia in JESC 2008 article; we can write information about that in a prose at the start of this section, and then list the TV/Radio stations. Wesley Mouse 20:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't understand yet, how it will look here, but let's return to this issue when there is more information on the actual airing of the show. Ruslanovich (talk) 20:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ruslan, you have misquoted a comment CT Cooper made at the RfC. The comment "This RfC will attempt to address what sections and content should normally be included in Eurovision Song Contest by year articles, such as Eurovision Song Contest 2010, Eurovision Song Contest 2010 and so on. CT Cooper · talk 12:26, 29 June 2012 (UTC)" was rewritten and timestamped from the original one. The RfC alone lasted approximately 2 months overall. At the time I had assumed that Cooper may have forgotten to state if it would also be implemented onto other articles that are part of the project. It was later confirmed that yes, it would also be implemented onto all by year articles. You only need to read the entire RfC debate to note that this was mentioned. Wesley Mouse 20:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I do understand the amount of input Wikiproject:Eurovision members will be doing on maintaining this and related articles. However, we simply can't use this RfC automatically, without any corrections discussed, on ABU Song Festivals. RfC doesn't mention anywhere in the text that it also relates to ABU Song Festival, Our Sound etc. ABU Festival is a new event, and if Wikiproject:Eurovision decides to take it under it's wings (is there a decision and consensus on it in Wikiproject? this can't be automatically inherited from Our Sound, as we have agreed they are not the same) then additional discussions may be held on whether RfC applies to ABU Festivals or any changes are required. As decided above, these are different events from Eurovision, thus the structures of the articles etc may be different as well. As an example, this "International broadcasts" point, which needs tweaking. There are many other issues of this RfC which can't be applied to the ABU Festivals, for example scorecards - as there is no international voting. Ruslanovich (talk) 07:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Now come on Ruslan, think logical please. Naturally the RfC wouldn't have mentioned ABU Song Festival at the time. This article was only created last week, the RfC started at the end of May and ended mid-July. When the RfC was created, Eurovision Song Contest by Year articles where used as an example - but we all knew as members of the project that it was also regarding Eurovision-related articles by year. And you have been told by Frankie that you alone cannot decide whether or not a WikiProject can decide to place an article under it's scope. That is decided upon by the members. How many times do I have to go through this with you? Let it drop please. ABU Festival articles will fall under ProjectEurovision end of story! And I have said that once these festivals become more established that a new project would probably be formed - but not now, it is too soon to create such a project. If you did create one, it would probably get forced closed, and its content moved to WP:ESC before you even open it. Wesley Mouse 12:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, they may well be different events, but there is also manual of style to think about, which is a Wikipedia policy in case you didn't know. Article relating to a similar topic, need to keep a consistency in regards to layout etc. We have already established that ABU and Eurovision events are music competitions, despite the formats being somewhat different. So the consistency should remain the same, and it would be totally wrong to deviate away from a policy on Manual of Style. Do you really want the powers that be to start throwing warning out at you for breaking policies? I sure as hell don't. Wesley Mouse 12:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Project rights to this article

Can you please specifically direct me to the place, where Wikiproject:Eurovision members have been discussing the idea to adopt ABU Song Festivals articles under the project, if this decision is already taken. I would really like to drop there arguments against this decision, considering very big difference between the events. If this hasn't been discussed yet, then may be it is time to start such a discussion withing Project Eurovision and to see what kind of consensus exists there on this issue. So far I have heard and understood only your personal opinion on this issue. Thank you. Ruslanovich (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Without sounding too harsh Ruslan, but I think you are not grasping the concept of Wiki Projects. Frankie advised you the other day that you cannot decide if ABU articles should or should not be part of a project. That is a decision made by the project members based on project criteria and scope. As I have explained before the RfC on the project started and ended before we even knew this event was going to take place. But you only need to read the Project's main page which gives details about the project to see that Eurovision, Junior Eurovision, Our Sound, and ABU Festivals are all listed as part of the WP:ESC. This is because WP:MUSIC tend to neglect such articles relating to competition topics (like this one), so it is better to have a project team who shares in interest in such a topic to help improve articles to a high standard. As ProjectEurovision has long establishment of dealing with such topics, through Eurovision/Junior Eurovision; then it is very logical to place these articles under the Project banner. Just because the project is called "Eurovision" doesn't mean we handle only Eurovision material. The project name is just a name given for a memorable purpose - we cover articles on the same or similar topics. Wesley Mouse 15:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Ruslan, I've found some useful pages to help you understand WikiProjects better. Please read WP:PROJGUIDE and particularly WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN, which reads "Many editors place banners on behalf of a WikiProject that they are not members of. This practice is normally welcomed by WikiProjects as it brings to their attention new and interesting articles. Please be judicious in making such placements by minimizing the number of outside banners that you place on an article and by carefully reviewing the scope of the project. Information about the project's scope is often available on the WikiProject's main page, and sometimes also on documentation associated with the template. If you are uncertain that the placement will be welcomed, then leave a note on the project's talk page instead of placing the banner yourself. If you place a banner for an outside WikiProject, and a member of that project removes it, do not replace the banner. A WikiProject's members have the exclusive right to define the scope of their project, which includes defining an article as being outside the scope of the project. Similarly, if a WikiProject says that an article is within their scope, then you may not force them to remove the banner. No editor may prohibit a group of editors from showing their interest in an article." Basically, a project (such as WP:ESC) can and some have evolved over the years. A project (ESC) may start off with concentrating on one specific topic area, but then as more and more topics that may be similar are found, they too can be incorporated into that project (ESC). Hope this helps. Wesley Mouse 16:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Wesley, "a group of editors". Is there consensus regarding accepting ABU Festivals under WP:Eurovision banner? Was this question discussed there? I accept that one editor: you, brought this festival to the attention of the Project. But whether Project members have agreed on this? Was it discussed? Sorry to sound meticulous, but there has to be discussion of this within the Project somewhere. How it was decided that "ABU Festivals" is listed on the main project page? Who took this decision? Was there discussion and consensus on it? What if other members of Eurovision project would have a negative attitude to the fact of bringing different international festivals, not-Eurovision related, under the banner? Ruslanovich (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

OMG Ruslan, stop it, you are now driving me insane with this utter ridiculous business. I have explained several times, as has Frankie, and other users. I have also provided links to Wikipedia guidance about Projects etc. Now drop it will you; please! It is now starting to come across as if you are trying to prevent a project full of wikipedians interested in this topic from working on it. Cease now, as it is becoming highly disruptive. I have not brought this festival to the attention of the project by adding a banner. Yes, I added a banner, based on a project scope that has been around a lot longer than you or I have been auto-confirmed wikipedian members. There is nothing more to say on this matter, so please let it go.

A person doesn't need a diploma in Einstein's theories to figure out the history of ProjectEurovision. Look at the talk page archives, you'll find tons of discussions dating all the way back to the very beginning (September 2003 to be precise). And even then nobody could have predicted there would ever be a Eurovision Dance Contest, or ABU Song Festivals almost a decade after the project's creation. Yet at the time of the project being formed they had already planned to include articles of a similar genre to Eurovision Song Contest. Just because the project's name has "Eurovision" in the title doesn;t mean we have to only deal with European music competitions that are run by EBU members. And I have already informed you that there is a new RfC regarding a project reform, looking into what we should be covering, how we should be operating. I did invite you to participate, but you seem to have declined or ignored that invitation. Now let's just forget about Project ownership, and get back to what we should be doing - and that is collaborating on an article that needs improvements. Thank You! Wesley Mouse 19:37, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, I do not want to offend you, but I can't accept this explanation. What if I, solely, without any discussion (after adding myself to Eurovision project) decide that Asia Song Festival falls under it's borders? Will Project members accept this my personal decision? It is same again with ABU Festivals. Project members have to be explained that this festival is very different from Eurovision, and needs different approach. They have to agree to accept this festival in the Project. So far I see no sign of consensus between Project members on this issue, and thus, as so far ABU Festivals can not be fully considered part of Eurovision project I can not join in as well. After the proper discussion of this issue, and the decision to accept this festival, though understanding that it is very different from Eurovision in structure, I will be able to join the project. I see no problem discussing this issue while at the same time collaborating on the article. We're doing very well in that! The only big issue left is Format paragraph. After that is agreed we can look on the Our Sound article. Ruslanovich (talk) 17:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Ruslanovich, I have spoken to the experts at WikiProject Council, who provide help with Project questions. They too have said that WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN covers your question. And as you are a non-member of a group your repetitive actions of trying to force a project from placing an article under its project is disruptive and can be sanctioned with blocks. I will cover each sentence in your comment above piece by piece. "What if I, solely, without any discussion (after adding myself to Eurovision project) decide that Asia Song Festival falls under it's borders? Will Project members accept this my personal decision?" - The decision on placing a banner is up to any member of a project who feels that a particular article genre falls within a projects scope. Non-members of a project cannot make that decision, and their actions will be deemed as disruptive and can be sanctioned with blocks by an administrator. If you are a member of a project and you come across an article which you personally feel would benefit from the expertise of that particular poroject, then yes you would be permitted to add a project banner on the article. "It is same again with ABU Festivals. Project members have to be explained that this festival is very different from Eurovision, and needs different approach. They have to agree to accept this festival in the Project." - Project members are not stupid, they are capable of reading and knowing the difference between ABU Song Festival and Eurovision Network formats. Such a remark that you have made does make it sound like you are being prejudice towards project members capability of reading and working out differences. "So far I see no sign of consensus between Project members on this issue, and thus, as so far ABU Festivals can not be fully considered part of Eurovision project I can not join in as well. After the proper discussion of this issue, and the decision to accept this festival, though understanding that it is very different from Eurovision in structure, I will be able to join the project." - Wikipedia is not a democracy, and what you appear to be implying is a project need to !vote on every article to determine if it should be placed under its project scope or not. This would be an impossible action, as there are over 4,000,000 articles - WP:ESC currently has approximately 50,000. The decision on placing a banner is up to any member of a project who feels that a particular article genre falls within a projects scope. Why do you feel you cannot join Project Eurovision? An invitation has been issued to you to join the project. By joining the project you will learn more on how the project operates, you will learn how the project stylises its articles. You'll also be able to contribute in the project discussions regarding reform, etc. If you don't wish to join, then such thoughts that you currently have regarding an article being placed under an article will be deemed as invalid, not to mention disruptive - and as Project Council have pointed out, such actions can be faced with blocks. So if you wish to continue editing articles, then you would be wise to avoid receiving blocks. I know ABU isn't Eurovision; but neither are some of the other articles that have the project's banner on them. Just because the project is called Eurovision, doesn't mean we should only have articles that are connected to the EBU - we can also have other articles with a similar genre too. Now if you bring up this discussion once more, then I will be forced to carry out the advice that was given to me by Project Council, and report you to administrators. Wesley Mouse 10:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

As per request, here is a list of non-EBU festival articles that are also under Project Eurovision scope (the full list can also be found at Eurovision Song Contest#Spin-offs:
Contests with non-EBU participants

• Our Sound — the now defunct Asia-Pacific version
• Sopot International Song Festival — held in Sopot, Poland, annually since 1961 (had winners in USA, Canada, and Australia - all non-EBU).
• OTI Festival — held by Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries annually between 1972 and 1998, and again in 2000 (had winners from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico, USA, and Venezuela; all non-EBU; with Spain being the only EBU nation to have won the contest).
• Yamaha Music Festival, also called World Popular Song Festival — held in Tokyo between 1970 and 1989 (winners from Japan, Jamaica, USA, Cuba, Indonesia, Canada, Argentina, and Australia - again all non-EBU).

This should now draw a close to the debate on whether this article should be classified as part of WP:ESC. Wesley Mouse 04:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)