Talk:Kosovo in the Eurovision Song Contest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Neutrality[edit]

To the author of this page:TRY TO MAINTAIN NEUTRALITY! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.67.246 (talk)

Your concerns have since been addressed. Grk1011 (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge/Delete[edit]

It seems like this article barely made it through its deletion review. One of the reasons that it made it seems to be because it was "obvious" that the country would debut. If the country does not debut, I am proposing that it be merged into List_of_countries_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest#Unsuccessful_attempts_to_participate. Unless a country has definitely decided on their participation or actually participated, we should not speculate. I am using this as a precedent. Grk1011 (talk) 21:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The whole issue is controversial and things are made more complex by Kosovo's participation being unclear. At the AfD in the end there was quite a strong level of support for keeping the article, but consensus can change and I will accept merging/re-directing the article if it becomes clear they will not participate any time soon (especially if they are not on the participants list for ESC 2009). The article can very easily be re-created if circumstances change. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I stumbled upon this by sheer accident and I'm staring in disbelief at both the crystal-ball article and the AfD discussion, a shining beacon of lemmingosity. But let's cut down to facts (something conspicuously missing in the AfD). To take part in Eurovision Song Contest, Kosovo must be admitted as an active member of the EBU. Now,

  1. This article claims that EBU has stated that Kosovo is eligible to join. It even provides a wannabe reference for this claim. But the referenced page is a list of countries with no mention of Kosovo whatsoever. If anything, it lists ex-Yugoslavia and duly notes that six (not seven) independent countries arose from it - K. not separately mentioned. But far from proving anything this just says about the irrelevance of this so-called reference and hence the unsourcedness of the claim.
  2. There is actually a pretty good reason why EBU never stated anything like this, namely because there are pretty clear rules for EBU membership. A country can become an active member if it is a member country of the International Telecommunucations Union lying within the European Broadcasting Area, or a member of the Council of Europe. Kosovo is neither. ITU is an agency of the United Nations, of which Kosovo can't become a member without approval of the Security Council.

All of these are simple facts, which nobody including the deletionists seems to have been bothered to check. So what exactly is the existence of this article based at? --Dzordzm (talk) 02:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Like I said above, this article probably should not exist and I agree with you 100%. I feel that this article should be redirected to the link above because Kosovo actually expressed interest (unless you tore that ref apart). Kosovo would have a ton to do before joining the EBU. This is like the other articles that were mass deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libya in the Eurovision Song Contest). "Country wants to participate, but can't, but it may if it magically does all of these different things"; its rediculous. I think the best thing would be the redirect, but if you want to delete, I guess I'll support. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 03:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
The article was quite defendable as far as I am concerned given the appropriate use of sources - at the end of the day usually meeting WP:N and WP:V is all that is relevant. Simple facts can change, and I don't like articles being built on editors assessments of likelihood as it is very much heading towards original research. However, this spell of Kosovo's interest to participate seems to have run its course and I will be happy to have the content merged into List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest as stated above. I would oppose deletion however as there is encyclopaedic material here and merging and deleting is not allowed due to GFDL licensing requirements. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
ok, how about here. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
That looks like a good idea to me. Camaron | Chris (talk) 14:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)