Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2009/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Confirmed participations

An anonymous editor has added in countries that have been agreed on having a lack of reliability into the confired participants section. I can't undo the edits and there needs to be a serious clean-up in this section. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Who removed the United Kingdom from confirmed participants - i thought the article said that the UK would not withdraw?? -Rick- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.50.106.79 (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

By the look of it it was accidentally removed when reverting inappropriate edits by unregistered users that deleted all the references in this section. The source gives a clear statement from the BBC that the the UK will not withdraw following speculation that it could happen, so I think it is logical to take that to mean the UK will participate in 2009 - hence I have re-added it, well spotted. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

But its not confirmed. There are sources saying that it is possible for the Uk to be split, now the BBC have said they aren't thinking about it at the moment, but it is possible. Therefore England, Wales, Scotland and NI are possible debuts and the UK isnt confirmed as it could split. 86.156.28.93 (talk) 11:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

No chance; the BBC has the rights to the UK entry.Robotico2 (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The BBC specifically says it is not withdrawing, and other sources taking about Scotland e.t.c entry (I have never seen any from the BBC on this issue) say the BBC has the rights for a UK entry as present. Unless the BBC says otherwise the UK will be entering as the UK - and previous consensus has been until that or similar happens Scotland and other constituent countries of the UK should not be listed as possible debuts. I also have to say this one of the better sources that have been used to justify marking a country as a confirmed participant, if this source is not satisfactory, a big review of this section is necessary. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Czech republic is not confirmed participant, Česká televize only said, that they have interest to next participating. We are not yet decided!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.80.64.236 (talk)

Individual entries table

Isn't it a bit soon to be putting in a table of entries for all countries when only Greece has announced their entry. I think we should have a side note beside Greece on the confirmed participants list saying something about Sakis Rouvas representing them. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 20:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think its too early to add the others. I was just about to make one with only greece when i saw your post in my watchlist lol. I think its def too early for the others and maybe greece, but id say a chart with one for greece unless anyone has an objection. Grk1011 (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I would agree that just having Greece in there seems appropriate until more info is available, other countries listed add little at present. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Is Bulgaria acceptable to put it in the list?Because they revealed when they will have their NF on the confirmation link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 01:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

About full name of broadcaster

We have never used the full name of the broadcaster in the Eurovision articles. Not many people have the time to read the entire guide on how to write a wikipedia article plus and is not even that simple. I dont see any problem in using abbreviations. Can somebody explain to me why it is such a big deal? Tony0106 (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is good to use the full name the first time a term is used just to make the article a little easier to read, and as happened last year, confusion can occur if just abbreviations are used. There is an issue with the Manual of Style not being fully followed by all Eurovision articles, and other articles will probably also need to be corrected to fix this issue. Following the MoS is not compulsolary, but it is highly recommended and is a great bonus to an article when its gets to higher ratings such as a Good article. For the ESC 2009 article, it will be helpful in the longterm if the manual of style is followed from the start rather than having to be implemented later. You are right however it is not that simple, per MOS:ABBR abbreviations can be used in repeat uses in the article as long as the first use has the full name and abbreviation indicated. Example... European Broadcasting Union (EBU) -> EBU -> EBU -> EBU. It is not a big deal as use the full name the first time does not exactly take up huge amounts of space, and I do not see how being helpful to the reader is a bad thing. Camaron | Chris (talk) 09:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Non-participants

I took out the "non-participants" section in the article. It was a little ridiculous, since those countries listed did not participate in 2008 anyway. Especially Tunisia which hasnt even participated before. Thats like saying that "Australia will not participate because they are not a full member of the EBU". Greekboy (talk) 00:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Non participants should be taken out,and just special withdrawal to be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 02:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense to me, the same was done last year. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it. The "Australia" example is just silly: clearly it only makes sense to consider countries that are both eligible to participate, and not completely unlikely to ever do so. A good indicator would be whether the country has a non-empty "X in the Eurovision Song Contest" article. Australia, Vatican City, etc. do not, but Tunisia and Luxembourg do, so they are at least worthy of consideration.

But in any case, why shouldn't the deciding criterion for inclusion be like for pretty much everything else on Wikipedia: that the information be relevant to the article, and that it be attributable to a reliable source? A legitimate news story specifically on the fact that "X will not participate in ESC 2009" is ipso facto evidence that X participating was a real possibility in the first place. And specifically for Luxembourg, there are at least two such recent stories: [1][2]. Heck, I suppose that even a (non-joke) news item proclaiming that "Australia won't participate in the 2009 Eurovision Song Contest!" would merit inclusion. On the other hand, if no-one is seriously expecting, say, Italy to return in 2009, there simply won't be a citable story about it, and it won't be necessary to mention them at all.

With the above in mind, are there any particular reasons not to include Luxembourg, or any other country for which there is a specific, reliable source stating that they will not participate in 2009? Hqb (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The source for Tunisia is for last year's contest. Are we supposed to add that link every year saying that they will not participate? And Luxembourg last participated in 1993 and their links say they will not return. So they are really irrelevant unless they are thinking about rejoining. They belong on List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest. Grk1011 (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Please note that I specifically asked about Luxembourg, not Tunisia (for which I mistakenly thought the story cited on the article page was from 2008). And clearly Luxembourg is not entirely irrelevant if it's still newsworthy that they will not participate in 2009. As I said, if nobody bothers to write a story about them not participating in 2010, I fully support not listing them then. Hqb (talk) 16:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Luxembourg hasn't participated since 1993, its assumed that the will not this year either. If we only list countries in it, then the countries that are not listed aren't in it, we don't need to list them too. Grk1011 (talk) 17:21, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. It is like listing Morroco who hasnt participated in the last 20 years at least, and only once. There is no point to have non-participating country section, unless it was a country that participated last year and isn't in 2009, which would fall under the "withdraw" category. There are many more EBU members that could be under non-participants too, but it's not practical to list them, especially when they haven't participated in years. Greekboy (talk) 02:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Albania and some other countries?

Do you accept this source as a confirmation for Estonia? http://209.85.171.104/translate_c?hl=ru&langpair=ru%7Cen&u=http://www.eurovision.org.ru/news/1-0-13&usg=ALkJrhisB06TLG6OXdIrHtu0PAHOPlqZ5A Belarus:http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eurovision.org.ru/news&langpair=ru%7Cen&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8 Cyprus:http://www.oikotimes.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3561 Albania:http://www.oikotimes.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3656 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 05:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I added some of those countries,and feel free to discuss if the links are not well sourced.I read all of them,and they are confirmed by the broadcaster,as an example of Cyprus,in which Tamta claims that CYBC is in discussion with some artist to represent Cyprus —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis (talk • contribs) 04:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed Cyprus and Estonia. The Estonia does indeed say that Estonia will participate in future, but it doesn't indicate who it is quoting as saying that, so I'm not convinced that it is a reliable source. The Cyprus source is just an artist saying she wants to compete. (I don't really care what Tamta claims - she can't speak for the broadcater) Again, I'd want to hear the broadcaster confirming participation before we put Cyprus in the "Confirmed Participants" section.

Good work on finding the Albania & Belarus sources though! AnthonyUK (talk) 11:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I've removed Albania. Does RTSH say they will participate? the Festival i Kenges has existed since 1961. It is not the national selection for Eurovision it is a music festival where one of the prizes the winner gets is representing Albania at the Eurovision Song Contest. Albania can withdraw and the festival will still be broadcasted. RTSH may decide to chose its representative internally and the festival will be aired anyhow. Tony0106 (talk) 04:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the source said they appointed a director of Festivali i Kenges,so that might be taken into consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 04:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible withdrawals section

I think we should axe the possible withdrawals section. With the current countries, saying that you will decide soon is the same some of the other countries which did not say anything at all regarding their participation. Grk1011 (talk) 14:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Well the content is specific to ESC 2009, the countries participated last year, so it is different to Non-participants. I think changing the section name might be best option. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that if a country says we'll decide soon, it is the same as them not saying anything anything. Grk1011 (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm afraid I disagree with that. It is different to countries that have not said anything in that sources and information specific to ESC 2009 can be given, and specific dates are given on all the countries listed on when they will decide, so it is not speculation. I think this section should be left until at least the end of 2008, when it should become obsolete to more up-to-date information Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just trying to clean up the page a bit. The less sections there are, the less chance that someone will add more unsourced or badly sourced info. But do you get what I'm saying? Announcing that you will decide in 2 months is the same as not saying anything and then deciding one day. Grk1011 (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible withdrawals

About San Marino, they clearly say they will decide participation by the end of the year thus possibly withdrawing (if they decide not to) or staying (if they decide to). Please, do not remove it. Thanks. Tony0106 (talk) 03:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Austria is NOT a possible withdrawal? Withdrawal are those countries who participated in the 2008 edition and will not participate in 2009 and/or those countries who decided not to participate after confirming participation for the 2009 edition. Austria has done either therefore is not a possible withdrawal. Tony0106 (talk) 02:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Bosnia and Herzegovina is confirmed participant

In Bosnian: Očekuje se da će na Evroviziji 2009 učestvovati 43 zemlje, a Dejan Kukrić, koji je prethodnih godina bio šef BH Eurosonga, kaže da će početkom septembra EBU-u biti poslane preliminarne prijave za učešće.

- Ništa ne stoji na putu da naša zemlja i naredne godine učestvuje na takmičenju za najljepšu pjesmu Evrope. Što se tiče početka priprema za BH Eurosong 2009, one će početi najesen - kaže Kukrić.

Dodaje da se očekuje i zvanična potvrda termina i objekta u kojem će biti održan Eurosong 2009.

- Očekujemo da dva polufinala i veliki finale budu održani 12., 14., i 16. maja naredne godine, i to u Olimpijskoj areni, koja je izgrađena 1980. godine - kaže Kukrić.

Translation:

It is expected that in the Eurovision 2009 will participate 43 countries,and Dejan Kukric,who was the responsible for the recent Bosnian entries,says that in the beginning of September the EBU will be sent the preliminary papers for participation.

- There is nothing bad on the way for our country do not participate in the Eurovision next year.The preparations for BH Eurosong 2009,they will start in the beginning of autumn - said Kukric.

I hope this is a reliable source,but if there are any concerns I can try to explain to you as much as I can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.76.219 (talk) 10:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Italy

It's down as a possible return. Where's the source saying that they might come back?Anto (talk) 18:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed it per general past consensus that Italy should not be listed unless their is solid evidence, such as comments from the broadcaster, that they will return for next year. I have also removed everything unsourced in the Withdrawals section, especially given as they are not withdrawals. I am not sure what to do with Austria, it is well sourced and specific to ESC 2009 although it is not technically a withdrawal, an idea might be to move the substance of the quotes to the Format section as that is what they are about. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Templates

Can we create the individual pages for the Eurovision 2009?It is a fact that the national finals wont change-they will be the same,so I thought we can already start doing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis (talk • contribs) 11:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think for some countries such as Greece we at a point where an article for these years entry can be created, so that is why I created the 2009 entry template. I do not think we are in a position to create one on every likely participant yet though, that did not happen last year till November, and I would like to avoid another Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belarus in the Eurovision Song Contest 2008. Camaron | Chris (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Me and greekboy created Greece a week or so ago. Also, I started linking the countries in the table to their participation in 2009 page. I also think we need to standardize some formatting such as categories, wording, page layouts, and templates. We can write it out on the underused Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision page. Grk1011 (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Glad that someone made a template. We just have to monitor it, so we won't get adds for every country yet. Greekboy (talk) 19:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Russia's page

Don't you think we should add a Russia page? I mean, they are the hosts after all. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

If you have enough information and sources. Try not to include a lot about Russia and the contest as a whole since most of that is on the 2009 page. We just want information concerning their entry, as usual. Yesterday, I made the guidelines for {{ESC National Year}} which you would use, so freshen up on it. Grk1011 (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Meeting

Discussion on the format of the 2009 Eurovision Song Contest took place at a EBU meeting in Athens, Greece in June 2008. A proposal has been made that could result in the "Big Four" countries (France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom) losing their automatic place in the final of the contest.[6] Edgar Böhm, director of entertainment for Austria's public broadcaster Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF), has stated that the current format with two semi-finals "still incorporates a mix of countries who will be politically favoured in the voting process," and "that unless a clear guideline as to how the semifinals are organised is made by the EBU then Austria will not be taking part in Moscow 2009." Should results from the EBU meeting not be out by now? It's almost AugustZu Anto 22:36, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I have not found any more news on the Big Four proposal, so I have just put it in past tense for now. Camaron | Chris (talk) 08:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re-assessment

This article is currently assessed as Start-class, but I think it is beyond that now. Does anyone disagree that this article generally meets WP:1.0/B and can be given B-class status? I am planning to give it B-class unless anyone objects, C-class is another option. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thinking about how much is left to add in the time until the contest, start doesn't seem unreasonable, but it may fit C-class since it is accurate, on topic, and sourced. Also, on a side note, we need to assess a LOT more Eurovision pages. Grk1011 (talk) 18:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should assess based on the information/article potential that is currently available. Start-class would mean the article has one or more big problems that is currently correctable, which I don't think applies here. I would be quite happy with C-class for now until we are closer to the contest and the article gets more stable however. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I could go along with that. Its funny, as you look from past years up to the current, the articles get better and better. Grk1011 (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I will be bold and re-assess it to C-class now. Yeah you are right the more recent the contest the better the articles are generally. Pre-2003 articles have a disadvantage as they were not created until the contest was over (sometimes by many many years) so they have not got as much attention. Also lessons I think from year to year more lessons have been learnt on contest article layout, organisation e.t.c that are implemented from the start instead of with more difficulty later. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

UK national selection

I note that [3] source has been used to mark that the UK selection show name for 2009 will be "Song for Europe". I believe this is based on a quote in the article: The BBC need an alternative and Graham is their man. He is currently talking to bosses about the Song For Europe show, which will run some time in March next year. Execs have big plans for the show and want to make it more glitzy, with one eye on X Factor. This could well be just a general reference to the show, which out of all the times the UK has participated has been the most used name. I do not think their is enough substance their to say that means that the name of the show will be reverted back to "Song for Europe". I have for the time being replaced the name with the current show name of Eurovision: Your Decision; I would not however object to removing the show name reference from the article completely as the new name of the show (if there is going to be another change) has not been confirmed. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Latvia

Hi,

I'm not sure if this link counts as a confirmation of Latvia's participation. What do you think? [4]Robotico2 18:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

They don't have to announce participation to withdraw; they just need to have participated last year. So I would say no it does not confirm their participation, but Latvia should probably be added to possible withdrawals. Grk1011 (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, from the look of the article, it says that a composer says they should not withdraw, while the official broadcaster has yet to deny or confirm participation. But I don't even think it should be added to the list of possible withdraws, since the broadcaster has not mentioned anything. So far it is only speculation since Estonia and Lithuania broadcasters have stated publicly comments, but nothing like that has been stated by the Latvian broadcaster. Greekboy (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

First withdraw

Georgia withdraw: [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.47.176.137 (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, but that has already but added to the page. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Liechtenstein

I was wonder if now that Liechtenstein has a national TV broadcast (since augus 15, 2008) will participate in the ESC. Someone can add a reference to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.224.217.246 (talk) 04:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

It still needs to join the EBU, then it will be able to participate. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 08:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Same with Kosovo. If Liechtenstein is not added, Kosovo shouldn't be neither. It has no active EBU member station. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.47.251.165 (talk) 04:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawals and lead section

I have re-added the withdrawals section again, as I do not agree with its removal. First, the section is not redundant to the infobox - the infobox gives no mention on why Georgia withdrew, which is not very helpful to the reader. Second, although it is happening both in this article and the 2008 article, per WP:LEAD, the lead section should only overview the article, it should not contain exclusive details of information. So I would also oppose moving all details of Georgia's withdrawal to the lead section. A quick mention can be given, but not everything. Yes the withdrawals section is rather short as there is only one withdrawal at the moment, but more can be added in the future and this article is not currently suffering from length problems. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I have re-written the lead to be more compliant with WP:LEAD. The original lead was functioning more like a miscellaneous section and had to much detail of certain topics such as the host (I have now given this its own section) and no mention of some other topics such as participants. The lead is quite short now at only a mid size paragraph, though that this is probably quite close to what it should be at the current article size. As the article gets longer, the lead can get bigger. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Ukraine and FYR Macedonia

Stop adding information about possible Macedonian and Ukraine withdrawals. Macedonian broadcaster has confirmed to ESCKaz that withdrawal is not considered, they have broadcasted EDC and are running JESC preselection in September. They are currently considering the selection method for ESC which will announced later this month. Where exactly in this source for Ukraine it is said that withdrawal is possible? It only says that in order to purchase better quality equipment they had to cut down the number of employees as it was unnecessary big anyway. Since it's publication Ukraine took part in EDC 2008, conducted national JESC 08 preselection and now is getting prepared to host JESC 2009 in Kiev. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.47.251.165 (talk) 04:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The ukraine source said that they might not have enough money and that they are still looking for a sponsor, which according to them could take over a year, thus that would mean missing the contest. If macedonia has confirmed add a source, dont just delete random chunks of information. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Moscow accepted as host

Source: [6] Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 13:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for providing that, I have updated the article. Unfortunately I overwrote Mc95's changes in the process, but they were nearly the same as mine, and mine also included the lead section. Camaron | Chris (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Serbia not in table

Can someone remind me why Serbia's not in the table of entries like all the others that have information? Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 20:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

We were only adding countries with actualy information to add. In the best case scenario, a country should have more than yes theyre participating and the name of their selection. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The reference about Spain is False

I speak Spanish and the reference about the participating is false. Now Spain isn't on Eurovision. Maybe in a future. Spain will confirm the participation.--80.31.12.99 (talk) 01:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The source confirms their participation. If you do not believe it or think that that has changed, then supply a reliable rebuttal source. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 02:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, Write this in google "Spain will be on Eurovision 2009" or "España participará en Eurovisión 2009"--80.31.12.99 (talk) 02:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The big Four will be in the Final, but Spain hasnt confirmed his paticipation. For example "If Italy will participated on Eurovision would be in the final", but now Italy hasn't confirmed his participation like Spain. I konw that Spain will confirm his participation in few mouth, but now Spain isn't on Eurovision like Croatia or Armenia. --80.31.12.99 (talk) 02:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Since you are trying to prove it, you need to find these sources. For all I know you could be right, but I have a source saying otherwise. I am not going to search the internet to prove your point. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 02:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I have reviewed the source and I am personally satisfied it confirms Spain's participation well enough, hence I have re-added Spain to confirmed participants. User testimony is not enough to nullify a reliable source, if there are other sources saying otherwise to this one the issue should be re-considered, but currently non have been provided and it is those making claims that the burden falls on. Camaron | Chris (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I added the reference about Spain to the article. If you read the reference website, you can find "...Francia, Alemania, España y Reino Unido, además de confirmar su participación en la próxima edición de Eurovisión,...". That text means "...France, Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom, additionaly to confirm their participation at the next edicion of the ESC...". The reference says it. Montehermoso-spain (talk) 22:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for catching that. The reference was removed again for some reason. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:20, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawals?

Why is San Marino in the possible withdrawals section? There are loads of other countries that are still undecided, eg Ireland, Romania, Moldova etc. Zu Anto —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.38.65 (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

They have not yet announced if they will continue in the contest, so they a currently in that section. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 18:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

If San Marino have yet to confirm participation, then why are they in the withdrawals? Having San Marino in this section may been seen as misleading information. Would it not be a wise suggestion and to stop all this back-biting to make a section called "Awaiting Participation Confirmation", thus putting an end to people moaning about which country should and shouldn't be in certain sections. (Pr3st0n (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC))

exactly Pr3st0n. Ireland han't yet announced if they will continue but they aren't in the withdrawal section. Zu Anto

I don't know who decided this, but if a country said that they will decide at a later date, they were put into possible withdrawals. I tried to argue that it was the same thing as not saying anything, but got no support. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I think what has happened here was that this section was originally created to contain information about countries that were considering withdrawing for one reason or another, now it has evolved to be more countries that have not confirmed there participation yet of which there is information about. What I opposed in the discussion Stephan was referring to was just deleting the section as it contains sourced info and I see no point in deleting it. Re-naming this section to something like Countries yet to confirm participation or similar makes sense, the current title is a bit misleading. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Austria

I'm confused with the Austrian situation - Austria has been added to the Possible Returns section, yet the information next to it shows that they ARE NOT participating... please can someone explain to me why Austria has been added to the returns, when it is 100% obvious that they have confirmed withdrawal for the second year in a row. - Also Austria have confirmed their commentator for the final; how come this has not been added to a new section "Commentators" (just like in previous years on this site)? (Pr3st0n (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC))

It's not there anymore. Keep in mind that anyone can edit wikipedia so sometimes information that is false is added and not removed right away. 19:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

The practice of creating lists of commentators and spokespersons in Eurovision Song Contest year articles was ended last year after a discussion at Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2008. This is in favour of adding them straight to Country in the Eurovision Song Contest year (or Country in the Eurovision Song Contest article I assume if a year specific one does not exist). The lists of commentators and spokespersons from 2008 are in the middle of being transferred. Those left are at User:Camaron/Sandbox. I would prefer this year that they are added straight to the right place, so the transfer process does not need to be repeated. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Israel not in table

Can someone remind me why Israel is not in the table of entries like all the others that have information? They have already confirmed that they are sending Israeli Idol winner, Israel Bar'on to represent them in Moscow 2009. (Pr3st0n (talk) 23:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC))

I thought that was a possibility. I didn't see anything that said he was def going. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 00:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Non-participants section

Are we having a non-participants section or not. First it's there, then it's not, and then it is again. Can we just please settle on one solution, and stop edit-warring. Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, i wasn't on much today but a lot seems to have happened. I'm putting my foot down, no "non participants" section because if they are not participating, then they are withdrawals and if they didn't participate last year that means they are irrelevant for this year, no one should assume their participation. No Kosovo or leichtenstein either as they are not members of the ebu. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 02:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

For my opinion over Kosovo, see Talk:Kosovo in the Eurovision Song Contest. I have expressed support for merging the article but I do not give any apologies for supporting its existence in the past. I will accept removing it from this article as well. The non-participants section is problematic as it encourages a number of countries to be listed in every year article, such as Vatican City - so I am happy to see this go. I have added stuff about Austria back to the format section where it was before, as it seems appropriate there. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)