User talk:Wesley Wolf/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

October 2014

Rebecca Is At It Again

So, Rebecca has been being disruptive again. On Around (song)'s page she's been continuously renaming the page to "Around (Julia van Bergen song)", I explained to her that if there are no other songs with the same name, the artist's name is not needed, yet she completely ignores me. She later just redirects the page back to "Around (Julia van Bergen song)" and as her summary wrote something along the lines of "stop changing the redirect!". I left a message on her page explaining this to her and hopefully she'll understand now, but I feel if we don't act now about her actions they just won't stop and she has to learn that what she's doing can't continue. She's received warning after warning about her behavior and at this point probably thinks that they're all just bluffs. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 11:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

On this occasion I think we need to assume good faith in her actions. There probably are other songs with the same title, that are yet to have an article on Wikipedia. So with Rebecca renaming the page in the way she has, is nothing bad; just pre-emptive. Wes Mouse 20:57, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the move log history, it seems that both yourself and Rebecca are on the verge of edit warring over what the article title should be. Therefore to be fair to both sides, I've issued edit warring warnings to you both, in the hope that it initiates mutual discussions on the article's talk page in regards to what it should be called, and hopefully reach a consensus. On a different matter though, I do agree that some of her editing is starting to become problematic, the constant adding of unsourced material, not using the edit summary to explain why she is making specific edits, and also removing pipe links. If the behaviour continues, then it will only be a matter of time before she starts to receive blocking sanctions, as experienced editors will not put up with cleaning up after her. Wes Mouse 00:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Range block

HJ Mitchell has placed a range block, which can also be viewed on their talk page, and it causing major problems as I cannot edit a single thing, and I have done nothing to warrant a block. Wes Mouse 14:57, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

My apologies—as you can see from my talk page, the rangeblock was aimed at a particularly nasty vandal who evidently edits from the same range. I've granted you IP block exemption. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:02, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

IP block exempt

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:02, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, HJ, I really appreciate your swift action - and good work on stomping out those pesky vandals. If there is anything that I can help with, for example keeping an eye on pages that these vandals have been targeting, then feel free to let me know and I'll happily assist you. Wes Mouse 15:12, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. If you felt like adding Yvette Fielding and Lizzie Greenwood-Hughes to your watchlist, I'd appreciate it. The amount of RevDel in the history will give you an indication of why I had to resort to extreme measures like hard rangeblocks. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

OK I've added both. Ironic that Yvette should be one, I'm a member of a group on Facebook that Yvette and her husband Karl are also members of. Weird eh? Wes Mouse 15:23, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Ha! Small world! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if this is of any help, but looking at the IP addresses and the type of range block that also affected myself - I wonder if it would be of help to know that I am using a 3 dongle, and if it is possible that these vandals may also be using the same mobile internet network? Wes Mouse 15:31, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, they use mobile broadband because it makes IP-hopping easier and is less easily traceable. I'll probably lift the rangeblock or soften it in a few days. Hopefully the nutter I was aiming at will have got bored by then, and even if they hadn't I suspect they'll have found a way around the rangeblocks. In an ideal world the WMF and real-life authorities would deal with this kind of abuse, but neither is really interested, so it's left to those of us who would rather be writing articles and the options are whack-a-mole (with lots of RevDel, protections and one-by-one blocks) or rangeblocks with the associated collateral damage. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Whack-a-mole. Hmm that gives an idea for a new game... Whack-a-Vandal. Haha! Wes Mouse 15:48, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you for all your hard work in creating File:EBU enlargement animation.gif. It really improves the European Broadcasting Union article and has plenty of potential. CT Cooper · talk 19:08, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Perfect timing with the coffee by the way, mine has gone cold. Wes Mouse 19:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Threat

Hi Wesley. Please, do not delete the following articles:

• The Smile Shop

Also, do not delete the following files:

• det are dit vi ska cd cover

I will be very angry if you do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk • contribs) 18:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Rebecca, please do not make bullying threats to fellow Wikipedian's. Wes Mouse 14:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Eurovision Young Musicians 1982

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations! :)--BabbaQ (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I feel proud that I managed to get my first DYK. Wes Mouse 16:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Nice work, Wes. :) Hopefully the first of many. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:14, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Underage Performers

Thanks for removing the Speedy deletes yesterday, after placing the one on the Betty page I noticed these were all Junior Eurovision performers. Because of the BLP issues they appear on the Cleanup Listing for WikiProject Musicians. The serious issue of having a page for an underage performer with BLP issues had me implement the WP:SPEEDY. It does appear however that none of these articles have any significant 3rd party sources attributed to them, only the EBU bio's. I would question the need to have individual pages for each performer under WP:NOTREPOSITORY. And while the contest is notable, the performers have yet to achieve any notability under WP:MUSIC. I would strongly suggest merging these, but will leave them considering you are the admin mostly dealing with them. Karst (talk) 08:10, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

@Karst:, the merging of these articles is something that generally does happen after the contest - depending of course on specific factors. The fact that these performers have won a national preselection in order to represent their country at Junior Eurovision (JESC) makes them notable in their respective countries. The articles then get generated for those who have a keen interest in JESC. Once the contest is over and the top-3 performers are known, then the remainder tend to get merged into their respective [Country] in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest article. Another issue however that I found is in the past, WikiProject Euovision are not as eager in making articles for these younger performers, unless of course they already hold substantial notability. But for bizarre reasons these last 2 contests, a small group of users are haphazardly creating new articles for both artist and song, and not taking into account the WP:GNG and of course the WP:NOTREPOSITORY guidance you pointed out above. This may be a matter worth raising again at WT:ESC for broader input. Wes Mouse 12:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, have put WT:ESC on my watch list and will help when required. Peace. Karst (talk) 12:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

@Karst:, I'll copy/paste this entire thread onto the project talk page, then people have a better idea and not need to visit my talk page to see the initial discussion. Wes Mouse 22:42, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Eliias

Hey Wes. Just to let you know, Eliias recorded a new song earlier this year. It has this line, Let the fire inside you grow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk • contribs) 16:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

@RebeccaTheAwesomeXD: is there a source to verify this fact? Articles must have sources to verify what we write, otherwise it violates all the policies and we end up being blocked from editing. Is that what you really want, for you to be banned from editing for violating the rules? And when you post on someone's talk page, please remember to start a new topic at the bottom of a talk page. There really is a lot about Wikipedia that you still need to learn about, the number of errors and mistakes you are making are unbelievable. Wes Mouse 12:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

@Wesley Mouse: You don't get it! He recorded a new song back in February! He even announced that he would present the new song, as he tweeted back in April: "New song after the goddamn puberty!" And just to be honest, I don't wanna be banned from editing. I'm trying everything I can to keep Eliias' discography increasing with the new song. RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk) 00:38, 19 October 2014 (UTC)RebeccaTheAwesomeXD

@RebeccaTheAwesomeXD: Do not add this song to Eliias's discography without providing a source. What you're doing is using original research which is not allowed on Wikipedia. You say you don't want to be blocked from editing but it seems you're doing everything you can to be blocked. Please stop. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 11:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey Wes. I'm only saying this because I feel like it - please, do not delete Eliias' new song, "Let the Fire," from his discography. I think that's the title of it, since it has this line: Let the fire inside you grow. I shall repeat again - don't delete Eliias' new song from his discography.RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk) 00:24, 19 October 2014 (UTC)RebeccaTheAwesomeXD

@RebeccaTheAwesomeXD: I don't take kindly to being threatened in the way you have done so above. And another thing Rebecca, you are violating the biggest rule of them all on Wikipedia. You say Eliias recorded a song in February and you also state it is on YouTube. I have search YouTube and there are no new songs by him. I have even checked his official SoundCloud profile and again no new songs by him. And if there is a song with the line "Let the fire inside you grow", we cannot assume that the song title will be called "Let the Fire" unless there is sourced evidence to back up this fact. What you are doing is original research and not only that you are claiming something without even verifying it. Wes Mouse 13:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Wesley Mouse:I'm sorry Wes. Maybe I should wait until Eliias releases a new single :-) RebeccaTheAwesomeXD (talk) 16:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC)RebeccaTheAwesomeXD

@RebeccaTheAwesomeXD: it would be sensible to wait, yes. If we guess a song title and then later it is proven to be a different name, then we have effectively reported a false fact. We have to remember that the artists and their management check the internet regularly, including Wikipedia - and if they see that we've reported something wrong then they are likely to get upset and seek legal action. That is what we have to avoid when adding content to articles. Always remember the five core rules to Wikipedia. Make sure that anything we write can be easily cited using only reliable sources so that we are ultimately verifying our content, without breaking the original research rule. And when dealing with articles of living people - we need to make sure that we are very strict with the rules, in order to prevent them taking legal action against A) WIkipedia, and B) the editor who wrote it. I hope this helps, Rebecca. IF ever you have doubt, then send post a message on the project talk page and someone will be able to advise you. Doing this will also prevent you from wandering into trouble and receiving blocking sanction for making a simple mistake. Wes Mouse 16:44, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

OGAE 2014

Hey Wes, I've noticed someone has been adding points on the OGAE Second Chance Contest 2014 but there's no sources provided and I haven't seen any Eurovision websites report on it. What do you think I should do about this? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 13:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmm I hadn't noticed that. If there are no sources, then I suppose the scores should be removed. Wes Mouse 13:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the advice. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 13:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jjj1238: the results are in, I've just spent the last 90 minutes adding all the results into a scoreboard table and then got an (edit conflict) showing you'd already done it. Lol. Wes Mouse 21:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Haha, sorry Wes, I just undid the edit I made deleting the table :P { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Re: Project Eurovision templates

Like this?

{{Escyr|2014|j=Junior}}	▶	2014
{{Escyr|2007|d=Dance}}	▶	2007
{{Escyr|2014|y=Young Musicians}}	▶	2014
{{Escyr|2013|y=Young Dancers}}	▶	2013

-- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 20:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, something like that. Although the JESC and EDC ones seem to want to direct to "Junior Eurovision young Song Contest" and "Eurovision young Dance Contest" respectively. I'm guessing the musicians and dancers versions are using Latin "Y" and Greek "Υ" (Upsilon)? Wes Mouse 20:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I added extra code after the above message, which ruined it, should work now though. Latin Y is used. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 20:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, they look cool. I've been working alongside Fort esc in bringing the Young Musician and Young Dancer articles up to project standards and expanding their subject matter too - so these new template codes will be so much help and useful. Are there any others you're aware of, that may benefit from this same restructuring? Wes Mouse 20:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

A ha that error I made before, I fixed, so no need for 'Young', so all that's needed is:

{{Escyr|2014|y=Musicians}}	▶	2014
{{Escyr|2013|y=Dancers}}	▶	2013

-- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 20:57, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

They look brilliant, AxG - you are definitely a superstar. I'm not sure how it would work for {{Esc}} and {{Esccnty}} - or if it is even possible. Wes Mouse 22:13, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

{{Esccnty}} has been done, however, with it already using "y=" for the year, I've put the Dancers and Musicians code as "x=". Do you think {{Escyr}} should also use "x=" for ease of use across the templates, or stick with "y="? As for {{Esc}}, that may take some more time. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 22:43, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

"x=" sounds better. Or would "e=" (as in Eurovision) be more use? X might get people thinking Eurovision has become X-Factor lol. Wes Mouse 22:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - Issue 42

Project Euroision News: Issue 42
Brief headlines Repeated policy breaking and several other issues are causing great concerns within the project. A few active debates taking place across the project that require urgent attention and participation from many members.
At the time of publication the project statistics were as follows
Number of articles	Good articles	A-class articles	Feature articles	Require improvements	Number of members
5509	25	0	4	2332	80
You may now unsubscribe from receiving Project Eurovision News, whilst still maintaining membership within the project itself. To unsubscribe, click here.

This newsletter was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of Wesley Mouse 08:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Reverts

Why did you initially reverted my edits on the Newsletter? --Gce (talk) 11:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Because the newsletter must only be edited by members of the Newsletter Coordinating team. You added a list of new articles to be created without taking some factors into account the checks that are done before they get included in a newsletter publication - for example, all potential new articles get checked for general notability guideline criteria, and then a random selection of them becomes published in the newsletter. Also the newsletter itself was not due for publication until the 31 October. Your premature editing caused the publication to be brought forward one week sooner.   Wes Mouse | chat  13:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest 2015

Hey Wes it's ConnorGeorge I've got your comment you left me and would like to argue if your saying that JESC2014 can't be on there because it's 2014 and not 2015 then way if Congratulations 50 years of Eurovision on there when it was in 2005 and not 2015 I've not edited it because I would like you to take a look at it before either me or you edit that out. Keep up the good editing, Connor :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ConnorGeorge (talk • contribs) 18:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I think you are getting confused Connor. OK it might be 2014 now, but the Eurovision 2015 article is about a contest happening next year, so any see also links should be regarding to events happening next year. This year (2014) should only be added to contest articles for 2014. That's why I removed it, because you added a link for 2014 to an article for 2015. I thought I had also removed the link for the Congratulations 50 Years contest as that is specific to 2005 and should only be in the "see also" section of Eurovision Song Contest 2005. Also please remember when creating new new discussions that they are placed at the bottom of any talk page and that you sign your comments by typing four tildes (~~~~).   Wes Mouse | chat  19:03, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry mate I haven't been doing this too long and I totally agree with you and get where your coming from. Thanks again Connor :-) ConnorGeorge (talk) 19:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Not to worry, I've removed the link from the 2015 - thank you for making me aware of it though, as it would have been missed.   Wes Mouse | chat  19:40, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

60th anniversary

Hi Wes, it has been reported today that the BBC will host an event at the Royal Albert Hall next year to celebrate the 60th, presented by Graham Norton and Petra Mede. Where should i put this info or do i wait until it's confirmed? Thanks, Fort esc (talk) 17:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I've read that too. I'm still thinking how this would be addressed, and doing a bit of background research throughout ProjectEurovision to see how they handled this situation for the Congratulations 50 Years show. So for now, I'm inclined to say wait for a while until we know what we're suppose to be doing. Best to get the job done correctly first time, to avoid page moves or article deletions.   Wes Mouse | chat  17:47, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Fort esc: I've read both the Eurovoix and the source at tuner.be. The only released information is that an anniversary show, similar to the 50th anniversary, is going ahead to celebrate 60 years. The BBC are in charge of production, and the event being held at the Royal Albert Hall, in London. However, the date or what the show will even be called is unknown. We cannot assume it will be called "Congratulations: 60 Years of the Eurovision Song Contest", as that would violate original research. And I'm not sure if we can even create an article using a vague title of 60th Anniversary of Eurovision, because again the title is ambiguous and we're none-the-wiser. So I'm definitely going to say we need to wait for further information from the BBC and EBU before jumping the gun and playing the crystal ball guessing game.   Wes Mouse | chat  18:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Where's the source for the Royal Albert Hall? -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 19:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

It's here (in French), para 2, line 3.   Wes Mouse | chat  19:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I realised that after I posted, of which I say this, that should also be posted as a ref since it backs up certain stuff that the Eurovoix article does not cover. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 19:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I've just this minute added that, and used "trans_title" to translate the source's title into English. Although the quote is a different matter, but I've used French and then (English) in the quote parameter of {{cite web}}.   Wes Mouse | chat  19:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Oikotimes have reported that it will take place on 31 March 2015 (provisional) and now provide an EBU "statement". Although after checking the hall's website, it shows that the venue is booked that evening. Thanks, Fort esc (talk) 20:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@Fort esc: Project Eurovision's policy on Oikotimes is that they are semi-reliable, and should only be used if they themselves cite their information. The website has been known to publish false material in the past as registered members of the website are permitted to post reports too, without them being checked for reliability. So I wouldn't trust that source just yet. There are other events that take place in the Royal Albert Hall, including the BBC's Comic Relief charity event held in March, which they too have used the Royal Albert Hall for certain things relating to the charity. So Oikotimes may be just rough guessing on the 31 March date. It is obvious that the EBU will want to include the winner of ESC2015 in the anniversary show, just like this did for the 50th anniversary which took place months after Eurovision 2005.   Wes Mouse | chat  20:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Yup, @Fort esc: Oikotimes are guessing at the dates. The "alleged" EBU statement reads

“ There are various exciting proposals from Member Broadcasters on the table to celebrate the 60th anniversary beyond the contest in May, which are currently in the final stages of being evaluated. A decision is expected shortly, so stay tuned! ”

- pay attention to "celebrate the 60th anniversary beyond the contest in May" So how can this anniversary show take place in March, when the EBU say "after May". Also I have checked the EBU website, EBU's twitter page, and cannot find any published statements that Oikotimes are reporting to have been "published".   Wes Mouse | chat  20:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I have just asked Danny Cohen about this on twitter his reply was "@ash_x_123 not sure about that Ashley. I will look into it." Thanks, Fort esc (talk) 21:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah no! @Fort esc: that goes against original research, surely! If he replies back, then we cannot use the Tweet, as you'd have asked the question in the first place, thus original research breach.   Wes Mouse | chat  21:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

@AxG and Fort esc:; I've been pondering over this whole thing for the last couple of hours, and considering the amount of published sources flooding the internet, I have decided to make a draft article in my sandbox. This is so we have at least somewhere we can start to draft out the article, add content while it is fresh in our heads; and then once the official name of the anniversary show is known, then the draft can be page moved from userspace to mainspace. This should (hopefully) prevent the eager-beavers prematurely creating an article and potentially giving it a false title (seeing as even the EBU haven't even thought of one yet). Sound like a reasonable solution?   Wes Mouse | chat  00:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Yugoslavia in the Eurovision Song Contest

Hi. You have reverted a change I made on this article, because the template used on this page didn't seem to work.

Here's what the page looked like:

Ljiljana Petrović was Yugoslavia's first entrant in the contest in 1961

and placed eighth. In 1962 <------- This was in a box and in a separate line

, Lola Novaković gave the country its first top five result, finishing fourth. This would remain Yugoslavia's only top five result until 1983 , when Danijel finished fourth with the song "Džuli". Novi Fosili also finished fourth in 1987

with "Ja sam za ples". In 1989, the country achieved its only victory in the contest, when Riva won with the song "Rock Me". <------- This was in a box and in a separate line

I have viewed this article on two different browsers, and it was the same thing on both. This is why I have changed the template. Now, it seems that it works again, so maybe it was a temporary problem with Wikipedia.FRIAFR (talk) 14:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

The error was within the template design, which has now been fixed and the templates work properly again.   Wes Mouse | chat  15:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I was so sorry

I hoped at first it was a normal person, but anyway, i'm so sorry for that stupid thing I did to that person with dyslexia... — Preceding unsigned comment added by EuroFan98 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

EYM + Thank You

Hey, Thanks for the welcome cookies! :) I saw on one of the pages that you are editing the Eurovision Young Musicians pages here on Wikipedia. If you need any help, do let me know. (I would very happily get you some coffee as well, as requested on top of your page, but I'm not entirely sure how to cook one here on Wikipedia :) Ervin.juhasz (talk) 21:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ervin.juhasz: hello there, and thank you for the virtual coffee too, I enjoyed it. Indeed I have been working on the Eurovision Young Musicians, and brought the 1982 article up to good standards. My aim is to re-write all of the contest articles, and hopefully the individual country articles too, although information is limited around the internet; and the official website doesn't provide much detail on the contests either. So it may become a slow process, but any help would be gratefully appreciated. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 09:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll be in Malta in the following days for Junior Eurovision, but as soon as I'm back home, I'll give it a look, and see how I can help you, and what information I can find and provide you with. Ervin.juhasz (talk) 17:45, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

What I'd do to be in Malta right now, the weather here is cold, so sunnier climates would be heaven for me right now. Enjoy Malta, and hopefully speak more upon your return. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 17:59, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	For remaining WP:CIVIL during the arguement with You all love me. Francinum (Talk) (Contrib) 14:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Aw thanks, Francinum. I don't even know how I kept my cool, to be honest. But the more s/he kept hurling abuse at me, the more I was giggling. I've now got sore ribs with laughing so much. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 14:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, Atleast it's not youtube comments. Francinum (Talk) (Contrib) 14:36, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

That was actually pretty good Francinum. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 23:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi

How are you these days? :) I have been busy creating articles, and I checked that I have done about 460 articles since 2010. That is quite an achievement. Right now, by my request a Bot is up for creation discussion concerning the ITN section. Take a look Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RscprinterBot 7. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey BabbaQ, it has been so long since we've had a good ol' chat. I've not been too bad lately. Been working frantically hard on expanding the Eurovision Young Musicians articles, creating respective country articles for the contest, as well as working on the ABU and Turkvizyon contests too. I'm not sure how many new articles I've created, lost count - but I think I'm in the 100's or maybe 200's. Trying to get loads of new country articles created for ABU Radio Festival, so many to do, but I'm not rushing them, just creating them bit at a time. I've also been busy working on a draft article for the 60th Anniversary show for ESC - its in my sandbox for now until we know more information on the dates and what the contest will be called - then the article can be moved into mainspace. That's great news though for your achievement, well done! I'm guessing you've created the bot? I'm not that brave in doing something like that, but who knows - maybe one day I'll make one. I finally got that DYK published, and thinking on submitting a second in the next week or so. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 18:08, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

ESC 2014

GA review has begun. I will be as active in the reviewing process as I can, but as you are a far more ESC-editor than me I would appreciate your opinion as well. Peace. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 17:27, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

It has taken them a while to get it started. I'll keep an eye on the review, and assist in any areas that get raised. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 17:40, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I declined using the original sign off during reviews because I useally comment a lot, which means I would sign off over and over again. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 23:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Jonas Vinther, we cannot decline though, we're suppose to sign all comments no matter where we post them, otherwise the signature bot will just do it. You could always use ~~~ which will just produce your name. Have you checked the GA instructions? Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Free Fall (2013 film)

Could you explain your reverts to this article? They go against WP:MOSFILM, which I'm sure you're aware of. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: I take it you didn't care to read the edit summary then? I self-reverted, as I clicked "thank" for the edit, and stupid bloody thing flashed up that it reverted, and I never clicked on that. Might need to reboot my computer system, as the mouse pointer is getting too temperamental and just going in the opposite direction I tell it to. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

The only revert that was meant to be done was this one in which you had removed the American release date. The article has a featured version over at Azerbaijani Wikipedia, and I'm in the current progress of attempting to translate into English and migrate that data to the English article. But it is not an easy task, so I'm now finishing it off in my sandbox. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:20, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, but have a look at WP:FILMRELEASE and WP:CITEIMDB, which is relevant to the US date (or any other release date outside of Germany, for that matter). Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:36, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (I hate bloody edit conflicts - some new idea needs to be made to warn people that an edit is in active state). Anyhow, that's the problem. The February date is for the German version at the Berlin Festival. Then its official cinema in May (but in Germany only). The English subtitled release was in June in the USA. Although I am thinking of explaining the full release details in a better prose format within the body of the article. My main point now is to get as much of the Azerbaijani version translated into English (albeit rough draft) and then work on the structuring thereafter. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Right, I'm getting frustrated now. I'm trying my best to translate a FA article from a language I don't know, into English, whilst trying to expand an article about a film. And it comes across now that you're just taking over and not allowing me to discover things for myself. This is the first film article I've decide to expand, and would appreciate if I get along in my own time. And I'm not trying to claim ownership here, just that I'd like to at least have a go at something new, on my own, and seek assistance when I get stuck or uncertain about something. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't matter about the American release date (at least in the infobox), so it shouldn't be listed there, as it's not an American film. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:48, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Its a German film, that was released in Germany first, but then got released in other countries too. Trainspotting (film) isn't an American film, yet it was released in America, and that is what I'm trying to show on the article, that it also was released in the States. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:50, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, so we list the German release date only in the infobox. Happy to help with any film-related questions, esp. regarding the Berlin FF if needed. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll just quote the key bit from WP:FILMRELEASE - "Release dates should therefore be restricted to the film's earliest release, whether it was at a film festival, a world premiere, or a public release, and the release date(s) in the country or countries that produced the film". So if it was screend in the US first, then yes, list it (in the infobox). Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (Edit conflicts! Pffffft!) All I want to do is get our English article up to a very high standard, based on the plethora of information that our Azerbaijan Wikipedian's have already achieved. But Google translator isn't the best of machines to use, so I'm going off what it does translate, and having to blind-guess the "blanks" based on source searching. I've never had the bravery to go for an FA, and as I have seen this film and totally fell in love with it, then I thought it would be nice if I cleaned-up the article and got my first FA under my belt in the process. If I need help, I'll ping you via the article talk page, as it will be easier looking over there. If you wish to list any pointers to assist me with my quest, then feel free to post them either here or at Free Fall talk page. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you, awesome guy!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to Eurovision Song Contest 2014 I award you the Good Article Barnstar. You are an inspiration to all Wikipedians and very appreciated member of the Eurovision WikiProject. Keep up the amazing work. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:51, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Lol, thanks. I was about to issue the same award to you, too. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 22:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Btw, I'm keen on the idea of making ESC 2012 (or ESC 2013) a featured article. Lets open a peer review and inform the project about it? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 23:00, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

We don't need, I already have them nominated, and ESC2012 is under active review by the FA Team. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, good job - I have left some comments at the 2013 FAC talk page. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 00:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Dispute?

I only first saw your comments here and here a few minutes ago. Firstly, there is no "dispute" going on about whether I'm capable of doing a GA-review or if my reviews are good enough. Secondly, the matter is settled now and was never of any real importance. Thirdly, a matter which is totally not related to Eurovision shouldn't have anything to do with the FA-reviews of ESC 2012 and ESC 2013. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:11, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jonas Vinther: like I said, there was no offence intended, but as you have strong involvement with the article subject, that an unbiased judgement towards an FA review would not be possible. Plus there was the ongoing discussion at GA noticeboard, that also raised concerns. You also made suggestions at the 2013 FA review, only to make some of the suggested edits yourself, which is not suppose to happen according to the FA instructions. Users make comments/suggestions at a FA review and are suppose to allow the nominator to make those alterations or reply in discussion mode as to why they feel such edits may not be appropriate. I just feel that in order for a fair review to take place, that people who have no strong involvement with the subject matter cast their review - an opinion/expression that I am entitled to make. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 16:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@Wesley Mouse:, none of my minor edits to ESC 2013 are related to the points I made on the FA-review page, so not sure what you mean by saying "You also made suggestions at the 2013 FA review, only to make some of the suggested edits yourself"? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest 2014 - Ondas Awards

Hi Wesley Mouse. I've seen you reverted my last edit on Eurovision Song Contest 2014. The Ondas Award has been specifically awarded to the "2014 EUROVISION SONG CONTEST – Grand final", as can be cheched at the Premios Ondas' official site.[1] As it can be easily solved, thought it would be better to tell you here. Thanks. Xelaxa (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Xelaxa: as there is a dispute over this matter, then it is best to leave it until the dispute has been resolved. Changing it to your preferred version does not help the dispute process, it just makes the matter very pointy in your favour. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 12:36, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

To my understanding, there is a dispute over where and how to place the information about the Ondas Award, not over the facts of the information. The Ondas has been awarded to the Grand Final specifically as it can be checked in the reference I referred to. I did not point to this before because I had not spotted it myself in the article. Instead of reverting back your edit on this, I raised my concern in your talk page. I never edited the article to to re-structure the content according to my preferred version. I would kindly ask you to assume my good faith. Xelaxa (talk) 13:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Forgot to say, I will not edit the article in neither of these issues until the dispute is resolved, in any case. Xelaxa (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

It is part of the bold, revert, discuss cycle. As the Ondas Award is a specific award, then it should use the {{Award table}} template - that's why a specific template was created for such awards. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 14:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm OK with the current template. I think the fact that the award has been given to the Grand Final shoul appear somewhere in the article, not necessarily in the table. Xelaxa (talk) 14:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Well allow the discussion to conclude then, otherwise no consensus is going to be reached. Some editors (including the GA reviewer) have already stated that it should be in the other awards section, but having that section expanded better so that it makes reference to the fact that it is about awards connected to artists and awards issued for the production of the show. So it is looking like the current method is how it will be. But as it was also stated, anything about the ratings and other awards issued for the shows production over the years is going to be better off added to the parent article Eurovision Song Contest. This was why I asked for the GA reviewer to comment, because we need to make sure we're doing the right thing, and not put the article's GA status into jeopardy. It has only just been promoted, we wouldn't want it to be demoted so soon, just because of your preferred way of doing things. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 14:48, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I already said in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 article talk page that I will be satisfied if a sentence is introduced in the "Other awards" section like the GA reviewer suggested. The GA reviewer said "including the Ondas Awards in the "Other Awards" section may be misleading". The only other editor that commented so far, said that if another section "can be considered [...] that can better house this information, then that should definitely be considered". I have also already stated I liked your idea for the parent article. When I've said that, and said I would be satisfied by the solution suggested by the GA reviewer, you make inflamatory statements to me. I am not here to with the intention to put anything in jeopardy because of my "preferred way of doing things". Your statements towards me sound of WP:OWN.Xelaxa (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Hold your horses there. I have not made any inflammatory statements, and I most certainly not trying to sound "WP:OWN" either, so I would appreciate if those false allegations were retracted. All I said was we are best to allow the discussion to conclude in order to determine a consensus outcome to the situation at hand. How is that inflammatory? And when I made reference to jeopardising the GA status, that is perfectly reasonable, and is not making me own the article. I assume you have not yet read the Project Newsletter that was published today? In that is a comment from the editor in which he states that the project has been "disorganised free-for-all" and that it "seemed to be going nowhere, or even going backwards in some instances". The project has started to aim high in its standards of article writing and layout, aiming to keep articles at a high quality is perfectly normal, not just for this project, but any WikiProject. We may not be as grand as WikiProject Military History, but we are doing our best to follow their high standards, and hopefully be just as good as they are. We've already had a lot of articles demoted, and that means we're slipping in our standards of article production. Thriving to keep an article at GA or FA status is in no way ownership. But if an preferred way of adding information were to be the result of the article losing its GA status, then it would be clear that it may be the reason for its demotion, and we need to be careful of that. That is why we need the debate to conclude in its own time, and then we know what steps to take thereafter, and hopefully avoid a GA demotion. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 15:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

And how have I jeopardised the GA status? I have not started an edit war to try to impose my "preferred" ways, and this does not mean I do not reckon this is not something to be rewarded. Your statements towards me sounded from my POV too overzealous to protect your personal efforts to achieve the GA status for the article, and your reminders of how you know how things are done right, kind of patronizing. But I admit I may be wrong and my allegations may have gone too far, so I have no problem to retract from the allegations I made and to apologize. I have no problem either to congratulate on your efforts to achieve the GA status for the article. Xelaxa (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Map

Hi Wes, I was just wondering if you could tell me how to edit the map that's featured on Eurovision articles as well as many other pages. I was just wondering in case in the future I needed to do it. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 01:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jjj1238: maps are not the easiest of things to get a hang of editing, as I found out when I wanted to have a go. They can be a nightmare, but once you get the hang of them and how they are treated, then you should be fine. I'm assuming you have used Wikimedia Commons before for uploading images? You'll also need to have the Inkscape software installed on your PC. And then check out the simple guide via my archives. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi

I have nominated Junior Eurovision 2014 for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

@BabbaQ: did it appear in the ITN section? I forgot to have a lookout for it. Which is excusable considering I'm banging my head against the keyboard 24/7 after chasing around and fixing repeated errors from some silly little user who, despite the number of time they get warned not to break rules, they ignore what people tell then, do what the hell they like, and continue to break WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:CITE, as well as removing maintenance tags that have not had their corresponding issues fixed. I even reported them to ANI a while back, and nothing got done about it. When users are clearly ignoring advice, then it is obvious they are not here to collaborate in a constructive way, but are here to just cause chaos for other Wikipedians who have to chase around behind them with a sweeping brush and clean-up their messes. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• Sadly that is a part of Wikipedia. I do admire your persistence in keeping ESC-related articles clean. And I thank you for that! :) I had a question for you, now that Amber won the Maltese national final. She was a background singer for Malta at ESC 2012, does that make her a "returning singer"? So we can add her to a section named that at the ESC 2015 article.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, BabbaQ, she would be included as a "returning artist" adding emphasis that she was a backing vocalist last time around. We've done it that way before. I'm just concerned that we might have jumped the gun in terms of song choice. It is already known that PBS changed the rules for Malta this time, and Amber may not go to Vienna with the song "Warrior" after all - she now has the choice to make whether to keep the song, change part of it, or take a brand new song entirely. There are sources to verify that too, including ESCToday. I think we need to footnote that the song may be subject to change due to the rule change by PBS. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:18, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, let the article stay at the ESC 2015 article with a footnote about the possiblity of a change in song. Yes, please if you could ad it I would appreciate it (both footnote and Returning artist). Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I will try to incorporate the articles in the "See also" section into the Amber article. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:27, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

I've expanded the song article itself so that it explicitly states the song may change. Just about to do the same for other articles too. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:33, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

• @BabbaQ: I've left an inspiring quote on the ESC 2015 talk page. I'm sure even you will have a giggle at it, but will think to yourself "OMG he's right, that does the job for any unusual situation that we come across". LOL Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 23:59, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Please take a look at Wikipedia talk:Did you know at the bottom. User Crisco is accusing me of not knowing how to make DYKs. I even helped you when you made one DYK. Perhpas you could tell that.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:32, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision - Urgent Message

Dear Project Eurovision Member,

There is a serious discussion been created at the WikiProject Eurovision talk page that requires utmost attention from all, or as many members as possible, as this could bear a huge impact on the project as a whole. Please click here to read the discussion, and participate peacefully. Thank you.
This message was delivered at 04:41, 23 November 2014 (UTC) by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of Project Eurovision Newsdesk

DYK for Eurovision Song Contest 2014

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Austria in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 draft

Hey Wes! I've worked for a while on a draft for the Austria in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 page in my sandbox, and I was wondering if you would look it over for me before I publish it. I'm hoping I can maybe put it forward for GA status if it's good enough, so let me know if there's anything I've missed or that needs correcting. These voting tables are annoying me a bit too, I wasn't really sure what to do with them, so it you could let me know about them too that'd be great. Thanks! Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 02:54, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

@Sims2aholic8: WOW that is one superb piece of work. And I like how the voting tables are neatly stored in collapsible tables. Think they should be rolled out on all articles of this nature. But yeah, put that content forward for GA review. Will be a first to get a annual country article to gain GA. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 16:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I'll definitely get onto that now. I wasn't sure if the voting tables would work better coming just before the references, as an appendix of sorts, but I'll see where I get with the GA review! Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

December 2014

ESC 1980 - Austrian commentator

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello,

I just wanted to point out that the commentator for ORF in 1980 was different. It was Günther Ziesel, an ORF journalist who was known for presenting the entertainment programme "Tip" and "Zeit im Bild 2" on Austrian television, as well as presenting the TV magazine programme "Alpen-Donau-Adria." I understand that the previous source supposedly verifies that Grissemann was the commentator for Austrian television that year, but here are some exceptions:

• 1979- Max Schautzer
• 1980- Günther Ziesel
• 1990- Barbara Stöckl
• 1991- Herbert Dobrovolny

Also, compare the Austrian commentated versions of ESC 1980 and another contest commentated by Grissemann: 1980: [2]. Contest commentated by Grissemann: [3]. The voices aren't the same. Thanks, Collin Butler 75.117.124.215 (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately we cannot use those YouTube links as sources as they do not belong to the official broadcasting channel, and using such would go against copyrights. Youtube videos would have to come from a Youtube channel that is connected to the host broadcaster for that year's contest or the Eurovision official channel. Also the actions you kept doing go against edit warring and you're lucky not to have received a block in all fairness. Also this source verifies that the Austrian commentator was Ernst Grissemann at Eurovision 1980. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 17:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but the commentators were probably added by a user, since like Wikipedia, the IMDb can be edited by anyone. The only difference is that you have to have an account before you can edit the IMDb. Also, did you at least view the videos and compare them? 75.117.124.215 (talk) 17:26, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Do you really expect me to waste my time viewing those? I have better things to be doing. And that is a big allegation claim to make about IMDb. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 17:30, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Whoa, calm down there. I was not rude to you, so why be rude to me? I was only stating that there was an error because I watched the Eurovision 1980 with Austrian commentary and the voices were not the same. So I gave you these two videos for comparison to prove my point, that's all. Regarding the IMDb, read the following Wikipedia section in the IMDb article: [4]

75.117.124.215 (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter - Issue 43

→ Issue 43 ← Headlines Quality as standard: a few Eurovision articles have been nominated for FA status and one is promoted to GA. Let Junior Eurovision battle commence! Project membership breaks through the 100 barrier.
At the time of publication the project statistics were as follows
Number of articles	Good articles	A-class articles	Feature articles	Number of members
5590	20	1	4	109
• HOME • TALK • PORTAL • NEWSDESK • UNSUBSCRIBE • ARCHIVES • • Published by the Eurovision WikiProject •

This newsletter was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of Wesley Mouse 13:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

A Dal 2015

Hi Wes! :) Would you mind entering the dates in this article: http://escbubble.com/2014/12/dal-starts-24th-january-30-qualifiers-announced-8th-december/ to the page about Hungary in Eurovision 2015, please? Ervin.juhasz (talk) 18:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

@Ervin.juhasz:  Done. I've added the information to the article. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 09:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi Wes, how are you doing? I just wondered if you could take a look at this template for me. I'm looking for feedback—would that information have been useful to you when you found yourself caught in one of my rangeblocks? Btw, the loony that rangeblock was aimed at has since been back a few times but we seem to have got all his accounts so that range is only soft-blocked at the moment. All the best, my friend! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey HJ Mitchell, I'm very well thank you. Had as few run-ins around here that almost caused me to quit Wikipedia, but after my internet unexpectedly went down for 2 days, it allowed me timeout to rethink my decision. In answer to your question, yes that template is good and would have been very informative at the time that the range block happened. On a tangent here, but how good are you with template designs? Hope you are well too. All the best! Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 20:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear. That's not good. You do good work here; don't let the bastards grind you down, as the saying goes. Thanks for looking at the template. I'd been thinking of creating something like that for a while and finally got round to it. Alas, I'm not much good with templates, though; I copied and pasted the fiddly bits for that one from Template:Checkuserblock-wide (which is for CU rangeblocks) and changed the text to fit. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:19, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement request closed

As a result of this enforcement request (but as a normal admin admin action) you are admonished for edit warring at Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision/rightpanel and for the incivility present in this edit summary. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, @Callanecc: I humbly appreciate the admonishment - never heard of that word before, so I to check what it meant. So thank you for teaching me a new word too, I do like learning new things. Would you be so kind as to explain a bit better as to what happens now, and how an admonished works? Also I notice that despite you warning the other user for incivility, that they called your warning as YHBT, which I believe is another term for trolling. So they have still carried out the same incivility, but this time it has been directed at yourself rather than at myself. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 11:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

An admonishment is just a fancy word for a warning in this context. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:24, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

So a bit like a formal warning/telling-off, but without the block? Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 11:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Yep. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've taken liberty to google up YHBT and it stands for "you have been trolled". Not a nice term for someone to use. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 11:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

@Callanecc: I hadn't noticed this until now, but remedy 5 mentions about civility and decorum. The user is still asserting an aggressive and inflammatory tone mainly directed at me. And has now started to follow me around to other talk pages and posting sly digs which is causing distress, and it is clear that those are the intentions of the said individual. I feel something more needs to be done, or perhaps even an IBAN. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 14:32, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

There's not much that I can do as a single administrator as there are no special sanctions for this topic area that I can use. All you can really do is take the evidence to AN or ANI and ask for an IBAN. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Merry Christmas!
	Merry Christmas Wesley Mouse, blessings and best wishes for 2015! BabbaQ (talk) 11:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you BabbaQ, and a Merry Christmas to you too. Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 13:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Wesley Mouse, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

Eurovision on Kpop articles?

Hello~ I've been noticing lately that the WikiProject Eurovision banner is placed on the talk pages of some Korean pop song articles. For example, this song article was tagged by you: Talk:Give It to Me (Sistar song). From what I know, Eurovision spans only Europe and I couldn't find any mention of Eurovision in the article. Do you have any idea what's going on? If it's some kind of oversight I'll just remove the banner but maybe I missed some key piece of info. Thanks so much! Shinyang-i (talk) 23:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I saw this in my watchlist and thought I could just give a quick answer. The song "Give It to Me" by Sistar took part in the ABU TV Song Festival 2013 representing South Korea. Song contests like Eurovision including the ABU Song Festivals and Türkvizyon are also administered by WikiProject Eurovision since these contests were inspired by Eurovision. Hope this helped. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 23:49, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, @Jjj1238:, that's very helpful! Looks like authors of Korean pop articles are listing the ABU Song Festival stuff in the awards sections/articles; if I'm reading the article on the festival correctly, it is not a competitive event, correct? Shinyang-i (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, currently both the ABU TV Song Festival and the ABU Radio Song Festival are both non-competitive. However, previously the radio contest was competitive, now they are both simply gala shows. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 00:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks, @Jjj1238:! Shinyang-i (talk) 00:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, @Jjj1238: for dealing with this in my absence. Perhaps we need to look at the project banner and see if it can have an extra parameter included, so that we could put for example |ABU=yes and thus it would add something extra like "This WikiProject Eurovision articles comes under the ABU Song Festivals scope within the WikiPorject". Wes Mouse | ^T@lk 07:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)