Talk:CCSTV New Year's Gala

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 January 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

China

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Delete this article?

Should this article be deleted? It is already incorporated into the Shanzhai article. L ^talk 14:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No deletion, because in the coming weeks this is hot internet news. And Shanzhai would become big news too, because in China everything is Shanzhai now. Arilang ^talk 19:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alainna has a point: if the entire content of the article is already somewhere else, it shouldn't have its independent article. But the solution is simple: flesh out this article (I gave some advice on how to do this here) or remove some material from the one on Shanzhai so that we won't have the exact same content in two different places. Madalibi (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mabalibi for the suggestion, I have already removed most of the content on Shanzhai, which was put in by me anyway. Arilang ^talk 01:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Arilang! I wondering if we can try to see the CCSTV here in HK.... L ^talk 02:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to this page

I just created redirects to this page at Ccstv (also works from "ccstv") and CCSTV New Year's Gala. This is because Wikipedia readers may not think of searching under "2009" when they look for information on this gala. Madalibi (talk) 02:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Televised broadcast

It was my understanding that there was no firm agreement between GZTV and CCSTV that the program would be broadcast. Is this correct? However, according to this article from the Jinghua Times on 2008/12/30, it seems that some parts of the program may be later broadcast over GZTV after the Gala is over, and GZTV's Hu SHu has stated that some of the performers may be invited to perform on GZTV. Does this seem to be correct with your understanding? L ^talk 04:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@Alainna, internet news is always fuzzy and flip-flop. And a few days later something new always turn up. Arilang ^talk 04:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

so true. Anyway, more search finds news from Sina on 2009/01/06: 发起人老孟：山寨春晚仅此一次不上电视. Also says that Lao Meng has pledged to become the spokesman for "shanzhai" and his side's reason for splitting with GZTV (under 与电视台解约全因网友质疑). L ^talk 04:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting consensus to remove 2009

Hi, at the moment the name seems not right, so I propose change the article's name from 2009 CCSTV New Year's Gala to CCSTV New Year's Gala, to make it more main stream. Everybody agree with me? Arilang ^talk 04:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. L ^talk 04:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed too. This is why I created a redirect in the first place. Madalibi (talk) 05:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, moving successful. Arilang ^talk 05:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulation and thanks to all of you

As the creator(and very proud of it) of this article, I hereby say THANK YOU to all the voters, because of your efforts this article can be kept. I especially like to say thanks to Madalibi, because his reasoning was the most powerful. Lets celebrate and enjoy Chinese New Year by watching CCSTV New Year's Gala !!! Arilang ^talk 02:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Wikipedia is not a democracy, and that it uses concensus not voting. The amount of votes does not matter. What matters is that there was a strong concensus to keep the article. Your canvassing [1], should have been in a neutral tone according to the said Wikipdia policy. But in the end it wouldn't have mattered due to the strong concensus. I would've voted keep if I'd seen the debate, as this article meets the notability criteria. --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mention by Reuters

CCSTV and its Gala have been mentioned by Reuters in the 2009/01/21 article China New Year show mixes Communism, commercialism:

China Countryside TV (CCSTV), an amateur troupe of volunteers and Internet supporters, will air on online broadcast of their own New Years' gala (www.ccstv.net) at the same time as CCTV's. The project has tickled local media, but only drawn an aloof shrug from the state-backed broadcaster.

"We are very poor and unprofessional ... We are basically the same as CCTV's Gala. We want to wish all the common people a happy new year," said CCSTV's director.

Interesting to see how international media describe it. L ^talk 04:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning the notability of the article

I personally question this article's existence, due to non-notability (if Joe Bloggs makes a video and posts it online, should we make an article about it?), and the possible confusions from the article title (I personally thought at the beginning that this page was about the CCTV gala, until I saw the "S". Perhaps alter the title, adding "Shanzhai NY Gala" or something similar?) -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs 00:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@李博杰, please read talk page on the AfD page. Arilang ^talk 01:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]