Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2013/Archive 1

Armenia & Finland
Some ESC 2013 sites on Wikipedia like german site:  http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESC_2013#cite_note-1 says that Armenia and Finland have confirmed their participation, is News.az a reliable source? CoolAbc (talk) 07:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We went through a similar discussion at Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012 in which it was decided that any website with .az wasn't reliable enough to use. An investigation lead to a conclusion that the majority of .az websites are blogs and have published false news.  One editor tried to add Finland on here a few hours ago, and used a blog website as source - that was quickly removed too.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  08:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What about this?: "Assuming Azerbaijan doesn't repeat (which no one has since Ireland in 1992-94), Armenia should be back in the fold in 2013." --Ahmetyal 12:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not actually confirming that Armenia will be back though, that is probably echoing what many people are think "I wonder if Armenia will come back next year". --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 13:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

If Spain wins, will the contest be held elsewhere?
Isn't it likely that if Spain wins the contest will be held elsewhere, as happened in 1974 and 1980? 92.20.116.35 (talk) 14:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Nobody knows; to early to speculate the ifs and buts. We're best waiting to see who wins, and then I'm 110% certain we will know what will happen.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Reliable Sources
I thought News.az website was no longer being used as a reliable source? Especially when they published loads of incorrect news in the run-up to the 2012 contest. On that basis, I shall remove the reference for Armenia's return as its ref is from News.az  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  15:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not just them but Today.az also do publish false articles, such as this: from June 2011, stating that both Armenia and Portugal will not participate, dispite the fact that A) Portugal did participate and B) Armenia were on the Official EBU list in December. --   [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 00:50, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What about apa.az? They have an article saying that Armenia will participate in 2013. Ahmetyal (talk) 12:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not a single one of the .az websites provided reliable information in the run-up to 2012 contest. The majority of them stated in June 2011, that 45/46 countries had confirmed participation for ESC 2012.  This has later been proven wrong.  So going off past performances, I wouldn't trust any .az website as reliable.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  12:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The ones I would trust though are eurovision.az and eurovisionaz.com as they have been monitored by the EBU. Today.az; guns.az; news.az; apa.az - nadda unreliable.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  12:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I also don't think that those escflashmalta.com or escxtra.com should be used as "reliable sources". Before getting into any dispute can we agree on which pages we should use for this article? I'm up for esctoday.com, eurovision.tv, and the official broadcaster's website. Don't you think so? Tony0106 (talk) 15:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * ESCXtra is a sub-company of ESCDaily.com and has been used on previous articles, so on that basis I'd say its reliable. If its been used before, then why cease using it now?  Plus they have published tons of news articles that have been found to be accurate.  As for ESCflashmalta, I'm not sure - don't think I've come across that website in the past nor do I recall seeing it used as a source on previous articles.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  15:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Just like we have used Oikotimes. I don't find ESCDaily.com reliable either. However I am not going to argue this year. I just want to open the discussion on to which sources we are going to use. I only removed the one from escflashmalta.com because they cite Eurovision.tv as their source and Eurovision.tv has not published any list regarding the 2013 participants. As for the rest of the sources, it is up to discussion. Like I said I'd prefer ESCtoday.com, eurovision.tv, and the official broadcaster's website (or anyother news article using either of the mentioned sources) Tony0106 (talk) 15:49, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I've just checked on the project's archives, and found Escflashmalta on a list of sources that can be used, some of them are being treated with caution - such as Oikotimes, who's articles should only be used if they also source where they got their news story from. Hope this helps -  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  15:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Aye, I can see the doubt over ESCDaily - but there was a discussion about the site, and it has been established that they operate in the exact same way as ESCtoday.com by referencing their source of published information and they also have contacts for the editorial team. Plus, like I mentioned earlier, that site has been used several times in the past on other ESC and JESC articles. If its been used before, then we may as well continue to use them. I see no reason why we should suddenly stop using Escxtra/EscDaily from 2013. Wesley ☀  Mouse  15:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * This year ESCDaily.com cited news from news.az and today.az, websites that were listed as unreliable. That is why I think we should "suddenly stop" using it. On the other hand, escflashmalta.com cited Eurovision.tv as their source with 11 confirmed participants, and Eurovision.tv has not listed any participants for 2013 as of today. Tony0106 (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * But if you remember, the articles that ESCDaily also sourced the .az's - they used the words "according to" or "allegedly"; and those reports from ED where never used on any of these articles. And apparently Eurovision.tv endorse EscDaily and EscXtra websites.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The other thing, as had happened last year - Eurovision.tv never announced any confirmed participants whatsoever; not until they published the final list at the end of the year (or January as was the case this year). If we're to only be going primarily off Eurovision.tv to publish a nation as "confirmed" then we might as well blank the entire list as it stands and just leave Sweden there, as we know they will be present.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Venue
As far as I know, noone knows where in Sweden it will be held, thus nullifying the 'Stockholm' part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.224.187.180 (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * there is rumors going around that sweden will hold it in more than one place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 11 June 2012‎

Moldova
The picture has to be updated to reflect every confirmed country; I'm thinking of Moldova which is listed but not indicated in purple, remaining grey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.247.146.29 (talk) 00:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Host city
Eva Hamilton on SVT just told Expressen that Stockholm is not the obvious 100% choice for hosting ESC 2012, Malmö and Göteborg are also being seriously considered. Will be interesting to see what happens.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 May 2012
In Eurovision 2012, Sweden won the contest with Loreen, Euphoria.

85.226.123.66 (talk) 08:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, we already knew. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 09:24, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

norway will participate in 2013
norway dont withdraw anyway så participation is a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 09:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Eurovoix and Liechtenstein
I've never heard of Eurovoix (Liechtenstein's source) before; it looks like a blog. Should it be removed until another reliable source backs it? &mdash; Ines  (talk)  20:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been looking into this, and seeing if there are other sources mentioning the same details. But as I was blocked for the last 24 hours, I was unable to comment or anything :(  Anyhow, one is back, and ready for Euro-action.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  20:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think its a blog; although the layout style would suggest differently. A discussion about websites was mentioned a few days ago, and had been noted that a lot of them are now using WordPress.org to host their websites on.  However, WordPress specialise in official website hosts.  Sites such as ESCToday; ESCDaily; ESCKaz - all use WordPress and have "Powered by WordPress.com" on their sites which means it is an official site and not a blog.  If the page was to have "Blog by WordPress" then it would be an individual's personal blogsite.  Investigating deeper into EuroVoix, they have a contact us and writers section, giving details about the company and the editorial employees.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  20:42, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Why is Eurovision Times mentioned, but then a link of Eurovoix is used? This is the original article: . They contacted the head of the national broadcaster, so I think it's official, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.171.39.107 (talk) 08:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That is quite simple to answer. In the Eurovisiontimes link you mention, Peter Kölbel told the website "a participation is thus possible in 2013 at the earliest...".  This interview has later been reported by Eurovoix.com - to which their reference has been used on this article.  Really, the reference from Eurovisiontimes should be added to verify the Eurovisiontimes statement, and I shall add that shortly.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  10:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Norway's participation in 2013
Check this out. http://escnorge.net/index.php/melodi-grand-prix/3968-floro-gar-for-ny-delfinale-i-2013 and http://escnorge.net/index.php/melodi-grand-prix/3826-orland-ut-steinkjer-inn. Google Translate this. Is this enough to say that Norway will participate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.224.149 (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC) it confirms the participation perhaps but the norwegian selection method remains to be decided. per sundnes have left and until a new leader is found the norwegian selection method is unknown but they will participate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 21:02, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Egypt
You may want to add Egypt onto the English Wikipedia page because they announced their participation in the 2013 ESC.

http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2012/05/25/music-world-reeling-as-egypt-enters-eurovision/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.173.185.78 (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think that source is reliable enough. Firstly the report is talking about an Egyptian entry that has already participated; and we know for a fact that Egypt have yet to debut.  And secondly, there is no reference in the report about 2013 Eurovision Song Contest.  One can only assume the article is talking about a similar contest that is held in the Arab/African region.  Until we can find something more solid to state Egypt are planning a debut, then its best to leave it omitted for now.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The tags for that report states 'spoof news' and the tone of the report is in line with a typical spoof, I agree with Wesley, its best to leave it omitted for now. Pro66 (talk) 11:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying that Pro66. I think someone on the editorial team of that website has been smoking a little too much marijuana lol.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The site is clearly a fake news site along the lines of The Onion none of the news from it should be taken seriously, the 'About' page (Page) indicates it's run by comedian John O'Farrell 59.167.194.19 (talk) 11:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't quite believe some people seem to have actually taken this article seriously, with such gems as "Hosni Mubarraca", "Yassir I can boogie" and "foxy Burka-swathed backing group". Not to mention the tagline "The news before it happens". The tone is clearly satirical from the second line onwards. 95.208.252.98 (talk) 17:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, the fact 4 other editors have all commented that they don't believe the content from the source, should be a massive beacon light clue that we're not taking it seriously - bless!  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

switzerland 2013
switzerland confirmed participation

http://www.20min.ch/entertainment/dossier/eurovision/story/25696018

Trotz dem erneuten Misserfolg der Schweiz am Eurovision Song Contest am Dienstag will das Schweizer Fernsehen den Wettbewerb auch künftig übertragen. «Ja, wir werden den ESC auch in den nächsten Jahren senden. Der Event bietet Sängerinnen und Sängern aus der Schweiz die Möglichkeit, sich einem sehr grossen Publikum zu präsentieren», — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.170.100 (talk) 11:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * This is English Wikipedia, please converse using English language, or include am English translation to any foreign correspondence - Thank you.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:32, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry here the translation: Despite the renewed failure of Switzerland in the Euro Vision Song Contest on Tuesday, the Swiss will continue to transmit the television competition. "Yes, we will transmit the ESC in the coming years. The event will feature singers from Switzerland the opportunity to present themself a very large audience " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.170.100 (talk) 11:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Eurovision-fr.net (France) confirm the date of the Swiss NF too : http://www.eurovision-fr.net/news/lire.php?id=1807 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.196.119.20 (talk) 10:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Oikotimes
Is oikotimes.com a reliable source? This article is about a possible BBC withdrawal. --Ahmetyal (talk) 11:38, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Oikotimes is semi-reliable. The reason being is that registered members of the website can also publish news articles.  The way around this is if the article on Oikotimes also provides a source within it, then it is reliable - if not, then it is unreliable.  Hope that helps.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I've just reviewed the oikotimes source you provided in this thread, and article has been posted by "another source", but doesn't say who the source is. "Another Source" could be the name of a registered user on the site.  Also, the article is only expressing UK viewers demands to withdraw from the contest, it doesn't say the BBC will withdraw.  If you read further down the article there are references of changing the selection process with a paragraph that reads "Paul Gambaccini, the Radio 2 presenter and author of a book on Eurovision, said the selection process should be overhauled next year with a world-class singer and songwriter chosen to represent the UK. He said: “I don’t expect Adele to sign up but I think we have to try to get singers and songwriters who are the modern equivalent of Cliff Richard and the songwriting team behind Congratulations, Bill Martin and Phil Coulter. They were big names and in those days Eurovision was seen as a great thing.".   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, the article is more expressing the demands of some to withdraw, which happens almost every time the UK does badly in the contest. I think it would be best to wait until more information of substance is released. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * See thread below.  It seems the free British tabloid paper, Metro, have published an interview with spokespersons from the BBC, stating the UK will be present.  Set me back a bit when I read it, as this is the first time in centuries, that the UK have been so early to confirm participation.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Map uploading issues
There appears to be a possible bug issue in regards to uploading updated versions of the participation map. I've tried twice now, the first time I uploaded it, the history list didn't even show the stored changes on the image. When I uploaded a second time, the changes didn't appear again on the second version, but did show on the first. Could someone with experience and know-how be able to investigate this issue, and perhaps fix it accordingly. Thanks Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, when I updated the 2012 map for the first semi-final, the red did not appear, so gave up and then when uploading the results for the second SF, everything was normal. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 12:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Liechtenstein
Well has 1FLTV been given government funding or not? April was last month, and a more up-to-date reference is needed. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 12:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen anything about the April 2012 deadline - but we know how slow the EBU are at updating their website with news on broadcaster memberships. So anything is possible.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  13:14, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Decision will be taken later this summer: http://eurovisiontimes.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/liechtenstein-no-decision-until-this-summer/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.171.92.148 (talk) 07:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Cyprus is planning to join Eurovision 2013
Cybc the national channel of Cyprus is positevely considering a participation in Eurovision of 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Findblogging (talk • contribs) 18:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Please provide sources that are reliable to verify this fact. Thank you -  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  19:02, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Controversy
Much like last Eurovision which was a touchstone for controversy because of societal values in host country Azerbaijan, the same will apply in the case of Sweden which is out of step with mainstream European culture and exposed to scorn for the actual recognition, and even celebration, of MARRIAGES between samesex couples. See LGBT rights in Sweden. They have also taken an extreme position of banning anti-gay/pro-family discrimination. Flagged for inclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.107.177.10 (talk)
 * I can't see that this is a bad thing at all. Quite a lot of countries in Europe approve of same-sex marriages and, as well all know(!), the Eurovision Song Contest is a huge contest favoured by the global LGBT community! Also, if everyone took your viewpoint, then every single host country in the past should've been "exposed to be scorned" on their beliefs upon LGBT rights, or abortion or any other controversial idea/concept. MC95  I don't like my name either. 06:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with MC95 - such information is just pure nonsense, and if it got included would be utterly ridiculous.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sweden is totally in step with mainstream European culture on this issue. Eight such countries have same sex marriage, with five more soon to introduce it. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 20:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Denmark 2013
I've been reading the reference that says broadcaster DR have confirmed the participation of Denmark in 2013. Is it reliable? Because they say that have already opened the registration period to participate in the national selection of 2013, but the page that give them is the Junior version of Melodi Grand Prix, MGP, not the national selection for Eurovision in Denmark. So I think that Denmark hasn't confirmed yet.

The source is:http://escxtra.com/2012/05/participation-confirmed-3/ The page of DR that escXtra give:dr.dk/mgp (It's Junior version) The real page of the Denmark's National Selection for Eurovision: http://www.dr.dk/melodigrandprix/forside.htm#/43632

JoseDLG (talk) 11:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * ESCXtra (and its co-company ESCDaily) have been used several times in the past on various other ESC and JESC articles; and both websites appear in a list of EBU endorsed sites on Eurovision.tv website (see project archive news here). It is quite probable that there has been a typo-error on Xtra's website; which is dubious if I'm being honest; but they are human just like the rest of us, and are prone to mistakes - nobody's perfect.  I suppose for the sake of compromise, we could just omit the Danish inclusion, until we can determine if Xtra's had included an incorrect website address.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Broadcaster DR has already confirmed Denmark's participation on their official website because they say that the Dansk Melodi Grand Prix 2013 (The national selection of Denmark) will be in spring in ths page: http://www.dr.dk/melodigrandprix/Artikler/2012/0529153209.htm . So, their participation is therefore confirmed. I am going to add this source in the article. Thanks. JoseDLG (talk) 19:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's good to see. It adds emphasis to ECSXtra accuracy and reliability as a source; as they too mentioned the DR website as a source in their report.  Cheers!   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  19:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

UK Confirmed
UK is confirmed ( http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/900381-engelbert-humperdincks-eurovision-flop-sparks-fears-for-future-uk-hopes ) 78.145.96.5 (talk) 12:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well Metro is one of those free tabloid newspapers that can be obtained from train station and such other places. IMO the newspaper is a good interesting read and helps to pass the time when I'm on long commute journeys across Britain.  So with that in mind, and the content in the link provided, I'd say it does look like a sort of confirmation.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  12:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Should I add them on the page? --Ahmetyal (talk) 15:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * To be honest, that doesn't seem like a definite commitment to participate. It is simply to BBC say it is too early to comment what will happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.172.139.92 (talk) 10:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I think the sourced article is self-explanitory really. Metro interviewed a spokesperson at the BBC, to which they confirm the UK will be present in Sweden, by the fact they used the phrase "it is too early to think about plans" in regards to the artist selection process.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:48, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Also the fact that Graham Norton said at the end of the ESC 2012 that 'we'll see you in Stockholm for the 2013 contest'. The UK has every intention on entering whether or not Norton has the power to confirm or not, he wouldn't just say nonsense would he.Arsenalfan24 (talk) 19:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Absolutely not. We have no reliable source clearly spelling out that the UK will participate next year. Wikipedia doesn't do sources that are "self-explanatory". Nor do we go on hearsay or passing comments. Please stop being so keen and just wait for official confirmation from the BBC, which will most likely come in six months at the earliest.  Welsh leprechaun  16:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you may have misinterpreted my response to the unsigned comment, Welsh. I was explaining to the person who forgot to sign their post, that the content in the Metro source explains itself with what is written within it.  I never stated the source is a "self-explanatory" source.  The article from Metro does state they interviewed a spokesperson at the BBC, although they didn't divulge the name of that person.  Metro (a tabloid newspaper) is classified as a reliable source, so it could be used if necessary.  However, as the content in that article is all over the place, it may be wise to see if there is anything else out there that adds weight to the printed interview.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Bit contradictory to say we have no source saying the UK will participate when most of the so-called 'confirmed' countries, the linking source doesn't say they are confirmed at all. Take Armenia for example, it says they have the 'intention' to join, doesn't confirm it does it. Arsenalfan24 (talk) 11:24, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Not quite contradictory really. There's a lot more to contributing to articles and sources than one might think. We can't just use any website as a source, as that alone is very controversial. Take for example if I or yourself, were to create a website and start publishing details on that about any country in the world "having intentions to participate" in Eurovision; and then use that as a source on here, it would be incorrect as well as false information. Where as if we used a website that was known to be reliable and used those as a source of information; then there is a 99.9% chance that those sites are publishing information of a verifiability content. You mentioned about Graham Norton mentioning "we'll see you in Stockholm for the 2013 contest". That in itself cannot be used, as it is only a verbal statement. There is nothing of written sustainability to be used as a source. Plus, Graham Norton doesn't make the overall decision as to whether the UK will or will not be present at a contest. That decision is made solely by the bosses at the BBC; seeing as they are the ones who pay the fees. Another thing is that Graham Norton specifically said "Stockholm". We know now that no host city has been decided yet, so Graham's statement of Stockholm was him being speculative and assuming the contest would be there. If you're still unfamiliar with guidelines on sourcing, then perhaps taking some time to read WP:CITE; WP:RS; WP:SOURCES; and WP:V to gain some understanding on the matter would be the next step forward. Thank you - Wesley  ☀  Mouse  11:54, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that Graham Norton's statement is too little to say the UK is confirmed, and it is appropriate to use judgement in that case to determine that he was just being speculative and wasn't confirming anything. I do think the Metro source is rather dodgy also, as it actually says that they asked the BBC about next year's plans and they said it was too early to comment, but makes the assumption the UK will return somehow barring evidence otherwise. From this, I would say it is too early to list the UK as confirmed, and as I have said in previous years, there is no rush to confirm participants. If there are other countries listed in the article which are dodgy they can be removed too. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:49, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Wesley, please don't try and patronise me by providing me links to different Wikipedia articles. If you actually bothered to read my post properly, I wasn't talking to you at all. Sorry, but it IS contradictory. You saying Graham Norton's verbal statement isn't good enough, well how is saying Armenia has the 'intention' anymore confirming? It's not. Nowhere in the source provided for Armenia does it say it is confirm or allude to a confirmation, it just says they INTEND. That's VERY different. Confirming means they WILL participate, 'intending to' means they might, but still have doubts. Arsenalfan24 (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I am surprised and stunned in all honesty. Providing assistance and helpful links in good faith is now considered as patronising?  If help from anyone cannot be accepted with good intentions, then why ask a question to begin with?  Armenia's "intention" to return is very likely; and we all know that.  The only reason they withdrew this year was due to security issues in Azerbaijan; and even then Armenia stated they would return to the contest under any other circumstances, apart from if the contest was to be in Azerbaijan for a second-year running.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  13:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 'We all know that' is not exactly a source is it? If Graham Norton's confirmation isn't viable, why should a 'intention' to join be? They run parallel to each other in the context, as Graham Norton saying what he said says that the BBC 'intend' to participate next year. The source for Armenia should be clearer with a definite 'confirmation' or something that at least paraphrases that; not an 'intention' to as that does not mean they definitely will. Arsenalfan24 (talk) 13:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain how you came to the conclusion that my comment of "we all know that" became a source? I don't recall ever saying such a phrase was a source.  It is starting to look very paramount that some parts of the guidelines that I kindly provided links to, are either being misunderstood, or rancorously being ignored.  Editors here from the project have gone above and beyond their call of duty to offer advice in this query.  There are enough reliable sources out there that state Armenia as confirmed and not "intentionally returning".  However, there is only the one source from Metro about the UK; and that doesn't go into too much detail, and is very vague.  For one, the Metro article only says "a spokesperson at the BBC"; who is that person?  They haven't been named, how do we know the Metro even spoke to anybody at the BBC to begin with.  Every year, the BBC's Eurovision website always says "see you next year".  Now that is an indication that the UK will return, and 99.9% of the time is enhanced with another statement from the BBC a few months later confirming participation.  Another thing worth noting is the list of "participants" on any of the annual articles in the run-up to the contest is always subject to change, and such details are only a guideline until the official participation list is announced, or the respective national broadcasters publish a statement confirming.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Possible UK Withdrawal?
Petitions to the BBC are being sent, according to that Metro article! The BBC seems to be considering it. Spa-Franks (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I doubt the UK will withdraw. There have been calls since we received 'nul points' in 2003 and we're still here 9 years on. The BBC take in the fact that the UK performed first as a result for Engelbert's poor placing.Arsenalfan24 (talk) 21:16, 3 June 2012 (UTC)


 * @Spa-Franks; Cooper has mentioned above that the Metro source is a little dodgy, and even I'm now treating that particular source with a pinch of salt. Is there anything with a little more sustainability and reliability, in regards to this alleged petition, other than what the Metro is publishing?   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  21:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Germany
Should we count this as an official confirmation. It says "Wann der deutsche Vorentscheid zum Eurovision Song Contest 2013 stattfinden wird, steht noch nicht fest." Translating to something like; "The date for the german preliminary decision for Eurovision song contest 2013 has not yet been determinated" Also the source is reliable, because it is the official german eurovision site. --Ahmetyal (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ - If its reliable, and official information, then yes include it.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Greece
Check this out and write about 2013 Greece's withdraw.. http://thekotetsi.com/2012/05/30/iparchi-to-endechomeno-tou-chronou-i-ellada-na-min-pai-sti-eurovision/ -87.203.99.93 (talk) 07:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, it seems to suggest that it is possible Greece will not compete next year, but it isn't definitely stated. I don't think we list possible withdrawals though?


 * We need to establish if the source is reliable enough first, before we would even consider adding the information.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  09:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * It appears to be a blog, not even one of the big ones, and it's missing even the tiniest "about us" section. However, the article itself is talking about an interview of OGAE Greece's president Christos Zafeiridis, who is speaking of the possibility (key word "ενδεχόμενο") of Greece not participating next year. If the interview is found on a reliable website (possibly on the official OGAE Greece website), then Greece could potentially be added in a "Possible withdrawals" section, depending on the context of course. Cheers. – Kosm  1  fent  11:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Correction: Christos Zafeiridis is the president of a fan club named "The Greek Eurovision Fan Club" (I just assumed the article was talking about OGAE) It doesn't appear to be an officially recognised fanclub. It appears to be the head fanclub of an organisation named INFE. (one inconsistency; the article claims Christos is the president, while the EBU says otherwise) Moreover, I've seen the exactly same article in about half a dozen blogs, but could not trace where that interview was given, apart from the fact that the interview was "exclusive". For the time being, it seems Greece's possible withdrawal should not be added, but I'll keep looking. Cheers. – Kosm  1  fent  11:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for investigating this matter Kosmo. Much appreciated.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  12:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Greece has not confirmed participation. Firstly the source used is not reliable and secondly it just reports an Oikotimes article concerning "strong rumors" that Universal Greece may ask Michalis Hatzigiannis to represent the country. Definitely not a confirmation, and even if it was, Oikotimes is known for its (un)reliability concerning "rumors". – Kosm  1  fent  16:28, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * And here is the Oikotimes article: –  Kosm  1  fent  16:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That one is a bit dubious ain't it! Firstly I had to get around anti-virus twice, to read the article.  Secondly, the Oikotimes article says its posted by Fotis.  Who is Fotis?  A member of the Oikotimes?  So the report isn't 100% sourced within itself.  Thirdly, the sub-header says "rumours", so that probably backs up the fact that it has been published by a registered member.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Fotis is the owner I think, but he wrote himself that nothing is officially confirmed. And in any case, even if the rumor is accurate, it doesn't say anything about Greece's confirmation because Universal Greece were only contracted by ERT for one year (2012): Regards. –  Kosm  1  fent  17:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I wasn't disagreeing with you Kosmo, I was backing up you point. The first line I wrote ? when it should have been !, and noted in my edit summary of the error and that I was backing up your point with my addition above.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I knew that, I was just enhancing my point for those who will try to re-add Greece using the same source. :P – Kosm  1  fent  17:19, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Phew, I can relax now, got myself in a worried state there. On a side note, I'm wondering what is happening with JESC 2012. There's been no new updates, and the deadline for participants to confirm was 29 June (4 days ago). The contest needs a minimum of 11 for it to go ahead, and well there's only 8 so far. Wonder why the EBU are being so silent on updating people!? Wesley ☀  Mouse  17:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * JESC? Does that contest still exist? xD Oh, it brings back memories... xD (Seriously, may it rest in peace) – Kosm  1  fent  17:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

New rules to exclude countries?
Is this worth the mention? http://eurovisiontimes.wordpress.com/2012/05/30/eurovision-2013-new-rules-may-exclude-belarus-azerbaijan/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.224.149 (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The real source: http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/musik/diktaturerna-ska-ut-ur-schlager-em JoseDLG (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Two reliable sources, and notable too. Very much worth a mention, although would we list as possible withdrawals or possible expulsion from the contest?   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  12:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I think a general mention of a possible new rule might be appropriate, although it needs to be made clear that this is just a proposal at present. Which countries will be affected is clearly highly speculative and politically sensitive, and is probably more trouble than its worth, so I wouldn't recommend that for now. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 16:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

EBU apparently denies of excluding any country from Eurovision.
According to this piece of news, the EBU deny they will remove any countries right to take part in Eurovision.

Source - http://www.rferl.org/content/ebu-eurovision-poor-human-rights-records/24599413.html

Belarus and Azerbaijan may be able to participate within the future, depending if this news is accurate.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.222.206.242 (talk) 20:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Firstly, the new thread is connecting to the one posted directly above it, so I've sub-sectioned it into that thread. Secondly, the latest source is interesting indeed, in the fact that the EBU are now denying their own words.  Might be worth keeping a close eye on this one if it develops even more over the next few months.    Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection again?
This article had previously been semi-protected due to a plethora of unsourced material and potential vandalism edits occurring on it. Since the protection expired, it seems that history is repeating itself; with many editors adding lists of confirmed/withdrawn participants that are not sourced; altering the number of confirmed participants to date in the infobox (it wasn't long ago that I noticed this jump from 18 to 60 - like c'mon SIXTY, are we smoking marijuana here!?). There also seems to be this frantic urge to add the rumours of a UK withdrawal, just because the British public want to withdraw. Be realistic here folks, the British public doesn't have a say in whether the UK participates or not, that decision is up to the BBC. Rumours/speculation shouldn't be included! If people started to pay more attention to discussions on article talk pages, then we wouldn't have this problem occurring and reoccurring year after year. Do we need to go down the avenue of requesting another semi-protection on this? Wesley ☀  Mouse  15:08, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think semi-protection is a good idea. There is to much vandalism. --Ahmetyal (talk) 15:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * JESC 2012 has even come under vandalism edits, by users/IP altering the name of a chosen artist for Russia, deviating off actual Russian representative shown on the reference source. I submitted a semi-protection request on that yesterday.  Makes me wonder sometimes with all this vandalism, what spurs people on to do such a barbaric act in the first place?  Do people get some sexual pleasure in disrupting the long hours of contribution work?   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  15:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it would be best if a request was filed at WP:RFPP for protection if it is necessary, so an independent assessment can be given. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll sort that out shortly. Any suggestions on the length of protection, or should I leave someone at RFPP to assess that?  I'm also considering adding a reminder in the next edition of the newsletter for people to be vigilant and also to urge people to use the talk pages too.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Semi-protection request submitted.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It is by default at the discretion of the reviewing admin, normally determined by the level and persistence of vandalism/problems occurring. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, thanks for the info there Cooper, I never knew that. I love learning something new on here every now and then, feeds my little grey cells, and keeps them happy for a while.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  18:13, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I used to work at WP:RFPP, but after frequently visiting and finding no requests to answer, I stopped. However there seemed to be a backlog today which I have taken the liberty of clearing. Hopefully an independent admin will answer your requests soon. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 00:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Israel
http://www.mako.co.il/music-news/local/Article-27362b76f46b731006.htm

I'm not entirely sure about this website being official or not- but it claims that Israel will be participate in Eurovision next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.227.205 (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Preferably a source in English would be ideal (see WP:NOENG). I couldn't understand a word written on that source, and using Google Translate just made the entire context look like I was reading gibberish.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

ESCToday have settled some long-time debates - finally
After months and even years of ongoing ifs and buts about who is debuting, returning etc, ESCToday.com have finally laid to rest a few rumour mills. Now, with all that settled up by the ever faithful ESCToday team, do you think we should now correct the articles (or sections of articles) relating to these countries? Wesley ☀  Mouse  00:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Kazakhstan cannot join the Eurovision because A) its fully outside the European Broadcasting Area; and B) its not a member of the Council of Europe.
 * Kosovo is not a member of the United Nations, it can’t either be a member of the International Telecommunications Union.
 * Lebanon had claimed to have been banned for 3 years, after the sudden withdrawal in 2005. However, according to the ESCToday, the EBU have denied this, and state they never banned Lebanon.
 * Liechtenstein has until the end of July to apply for an active EBU memberships, and also be granted it in time by the EBU; if it wishes to debut in 2013.
 * Luxembourg and Monaco still have active EBU membership, but have no plans to return just yet.
 * Morocco was supposed to be returning in 2012, but apparently SNRT had denied this fact to ESCKaz. ESCToday seem to stress the point that ESCKaz "allegedly" contacted SNRT; as if to imply that ESCKaz are unreliable with their news.
 * Palestine is not a member of the EBU, nor have they applied to be.
 * Qatar cannot join the Eurovision because A) its fully outside the European Broadcasting Area; and B) its not a member of the Council of Europe.
 * In other words, Lebanon was able to participate since 2005? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innano1 (talk • contribs)
 * It sure does look that way, yes. And not only that, Lebanon have always been allowed to debut every year after that, no ban existed. (according to ESCToday).  Wasn't it ESCtoday who reported the ban back in 2005?   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  19:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Andorra will not be back in 2013
Andorra will continue not to participate within Eurovision next year.

Shall we colour them yellow on the participation map?

Source - http://escxtra.com/2012/06/unsuccessful-talks-no-return-in-2013/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.35.18 (talk) 19:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've put Andorra as yellow on the map, since current sources are saying a no return for 2013. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 20:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I thought Andorra had cancelled their membership with the EBU anyway? So they wouldn't have been able to return to the contest without membership to begin with.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  10:42, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * All we can confirm at this time is that right now a participation of Andorra in ESC 2013 is unlikely.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom "Confirmed" thing has no mention from the BBC that the United Kingdom will enter next year and its just speculation therefore I would say the United Kingdom hasn't confirmed for next year. C. 22468   Talk to me  14:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The source used is reliable, and would give enough WP:V for the time being. The source also cites newspapers, which adds more weight to verifiability.  Why has everyone got this urge to omit the UK from the list, as if they don't want them to participate?  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Remember the vital EBU rule here. "Every nation who participated in a contest, is under the expectation of being present at the following contest, unless they state otherwise".   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The thing is though neither of the links mention if the United Kingdom will or won't enter in 2013, with the other countries it is explicit confirmation from their national broadcasters, the BBC has so far remained silent on it and there is also talk in other newspapers that the United Kingdom will withdraw, I would wait till the BBC gives conformation on entry for 2013 before including it in the article. C. 22468   Talk to me  19:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sourced information doesn't have to explicitly come from the website of the national broadcaster. This has never been the case in previous articles, so why for 2013 should the way we have used sources change so dramatically?  It is always advised to use secondary sources, rather than primary ones - for which using the broadcaster websites are primary.  Both the sources currently used state that they have spoken to a spokesperson at the BBC.  We have to take their word for it, as it is a printed interview.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  19:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * And in reply to your comment "neither of the links mention if the United Kingdom will or won't enter in 2013" - have you not read any of the words in the linked sources? With headlines on them that read "United Kingdom: BBC Going Back to National Final" and "Eurovision 2013: UK Goes Back to National Final" and also " Daily Mail reports that the BBC has no intention of withdrawing and will discuss a new form of national selection in the coming weeks" are very clear indications of not withdrawing.  The BBC wouldn't inform a reporter that they are going back to a national final selection process if they were not confirming participation.  After all, the national final is for the sole purpose of selecting a representative for Eurovision.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  19:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

HRT 'apparently' confirm Croatia's confirmation for 2013
I've been looking for some sources, but I'm unsure about this one. Anyone think it's valid?

Source - http://www.eurovisionfamily.tv/user/BradleyUK/blog/?id=170672 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.35.18 (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Source cannot be used as its a self-published blog from a fan's profile page on Eurovision.tv - therefore its not reliable.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  16:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Montenegro 2013
Why Montenegro aren't in list, which country have confirmed participation? in russian wikipedia Montenegro is confirmed participation. They just have a the reference.


 * Probably because it isn't sourced anywhere by reliable sources for it to be included on here. I can't comment on how our Russian Wikipedia-counterparts operate in regards to sources, but here on English wikipedia, we take sources and verifiability very seriously.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  14:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Bidding Process
Apparently, Gothenburg has reportedly withdrawn it's bid for ESC 2013 due to the fact that Scandinavium is not available at the end of April, which Eurovision organizers require. Articles from: ESCXtra and Poplight.se (Swedish) Dfizzles (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well that's embarrassing, I just noticed this was on the article already! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfizzles (talk • contribs) 16:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Slovenia 2013
Slovenia has confirmed to participate Eurovision Song Contest 2013 in Sweden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.219.166.240 (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Please provide a relable source so we can add Slovenia to the list. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Hint of a possible 2013 return from Poland?
One of Poland's past representatives, Marcin Mroziński is very keen to represent Poland again in future editions of Eurovision, After he failed to get to the final in 2010 with his song "Legenda"

It's nothing to confirm Poland's return, but it's a gist of hope right?

Source - http://www.eurovision.tv/page/news?id=62983&_t=marcin_mrozinski_i_am_ready_to_do_eurovision_again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.35.18 (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Please read the sourced article carefully. I had already read that one once, and no where in it does Marcin state he would do 2013, he just said that he would represent Poland again in the future if TVP invited him. Plus a speculative hint wouldn't stand much weight on an article that bases itself on verifiability, notability, and accuracy.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  18:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

A suggestion
I came to think about the fact that Sweden (and possibly Stockholm) will become the first country/city to host ESC twice during the 2000s. Is that worth a mentioning in the article? Just a suggestion.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't word it as the first in the 2000's, as it is common knowledge that the 2000's are referenced as 2000 - 2009. We're currently in the 2010's (2010 - 2019).  The correct term would be the first city to host the ESC twice in the 21st century.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * But I wouldn't mention it just yet, until we know that Stockholm has been confirmed as the host city, as we would be speculating if we did mention beforehand, and that goes against WP:CRYSTAL.  Wesley  ☀  Mouse  17:41, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree fully!--BabbaQ (talk) 19:42, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Malmö Arena selected
The Malmö Arena has been selected as the host arena of the ESC 2013. Interesting.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:04, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yep, I thought that. Good choice though,  We just need the svg logo to be updated with Malmo showing on it.  Already left a note on AxG's page so that he can create the new images, seeing as png versions of logos are not permitted.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse
 * SVG image updated. However Wesley, PNG's are perfectly acceptable to be used, I've initially uploaded a PNG version here, before working on an SVG one. :) --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 11:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, didn't know PNG's were allowed as a temporary measure. As I've always noticed PNG versions get removed in the past, I have assumed that they were not permitted and that SVGs were preferred.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  18:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The 2010 is PNG and the 2011 image is a JPG (I don't like using JPG), put the image is tagged SVG, however I would say it is impossible to accurately transfer them to SVG. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just out of curiosity, is it the font type for the host city that is a reason of difficulty for creating svg types? I have the font type pre-install on my laptop, it was one of the 5000 pre-installed fonts that came with it.  I did attempt to open the inkscape software that is used for the maps, and update the host city, but couldn't figure out how to add text.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  18:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For some reason, It's not the standard 'Eurostile' font (which I have) that is used, it's 'Eurostile Extended #2', which I what I don't have, so gather letters from the previous Image files, e.g. M from Moscow, A from Athens etc. But it's the complex background images of the heart and baubles --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I've got the complete 'Eurostile' font family, including 'Eurostile Extended #2'. I've also (somehow) got the font type used for London 2012. My laptop is Samsung RV510, running on Windows 7, so I can only assume they pre-installed them. Wesley ☀  Mouse  19:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The computer I bought only came with under 50, but I collected over 2,000 free fonts from the internet over time (including London 2012). Any chance you could email me, the font file for Eurostile Extended? --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 19:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think the selection of Malmö was good and unexpected too.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I might be mistaken here but is Malmö the least populated host city of the ESC in the 21st century when it comes to citizens in the main city. Because in that case perhaps Malmö will hold the same "dignity" as Millstreet in the 90s for now. I have realised that Malmö Arena will be the third smallest host arena when it comes to spectator capacity of the ESC in the 21st century even though that isnt notable in itself.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It will be smallest host arena in the 2010s so far atleast for sure.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * In the 21st century, and according to their articles, Saku Suurhall Arena (2002), Skonto Hall (2003), Abdi İpekçi Arena (2004), Palace of Sports, Kiev (2005) and Hartwall Areena (2007) have a smaller spectator capacity than Malmö Arena. Xelaxa (talk) 21:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * In the twenty-first century yes. But BabbaQ said Malmo Arena would be the smallest so far in the 2010s (which is covering the years 2010 - 2019).  The ones you've listed are in the 2000s (2000 - 2009).   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  21:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Who cares? Malmö got it and Sweden with SVT will organize an awesome show. If people do read the news, they'll actually discover that both the EBU and SVT wanted the contest to become less expensive and huge, so that smaller countries (such as Malta, Cyprus etc.) could easily host the contest without new and huge venues such as the Baku Crystal Hall. Welcome to a new and more personal Eurovision in Malmö 2013! 46.194.19.205 (talk) 04:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Not to be a downer, but I know everyone is excited that the host city has been chosen, but as a reminder to us all the Talk page is supposed to relate to the article and should not serve as a forum to express our opinions regarding the article matter (i.e., opinions regarding the selection of Malmö). Felt like I needed to say mention this just in case an off-topic discussion started! Dfizzles (talk) 07:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm somewhat perplexed at the above remark by Dfizzles. I see no forum-like context made in this thread, slight opinion perhaps, but the main tone of context is clearly surrounding the articles alone.   Wesley   Mouse  11:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For clarification, it wasn't a specific comment that appeared in the thread, but just a friendly reminder (especially for those who are non-project member contributors to the Talk page) because some comments such as the one from 46.194.19.205 could in my opinion lead to a forum-like discussion. Especially with the discussion of what could come out of the contest being hosted in smaller venues since they are not really facts yet since they haven't happened they're more of a possibility. If that makes more sense. Dfizzles (talk) 03:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Confirmation of Turkey
Turkey will be back this year too http://escxtra.com/2012/07/participation-in-2013-confirmed-2/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.224.149 (talk) 11:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * To have a return you have to had declined participation one year. So it is a continued participation and not a return.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Good point there by BabbaQ, although I kinda got a gist of what was actually meant by the thread header. I'll reword the header to avoid any subsequent confusion though.  Feel free to revert it if anyone opposes.   Wesley   Mouse  11:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I meant a continued participation. I just wanted to name the thread "The Return of Turkey", since it sounded cooler... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.224.149 (talk) 12:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah ;)--BabbaQ (talk) 12:33, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

According to Escxtra Turkey considers withdrawl in 2013: http://escxtra.com/2012/08/trt-considering-withdrawl-from-the-contest/ Aejsing (talk) 13:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Its a rumour circulating, hence why I removed it. I'm looking for something more solid to back up ESCXtra's report.   Wesley   Mouse  13:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * On August 11, 2012, General Administrator of TRT, Mr.Ibrahim Sahin said: It's not a contest, it's a show. We can think to withdraw as an alternative way for 2013. http://gundem.milliyet.com.tr/eurovizyon-yarisma-degil-sov/gundem/gundemdetay/11.08.2012/1579314/default.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.121.192.201 (talk) 18:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Reason
Should we mention in the article the fact that SVT decided on the Malmö Arena to keep ESC 2013 smaller then previous years. The executive producer told that they decided on Malmö over Stockholm partly because they wanted the trend of huge arenas to stop next year. To keep it smaller and more personal and to cut costs for everything surrounding the event and focus on the stage and production of the main shows. A source for it all can be found in the Malmö Arena article. I think we should mention it as it is a trend change, as previously Eurovision has been held in larger and larger arenas.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps making a "Choice of Arena" or "Changes for 2013" section or similar to expand on the matter.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmm we could do. I know that the EBU announced before the 2012 contest had even begun in May, that they already decided contest budgets from 2013 onwards would be a mandatory small scale, so that the other countries who pulled out because of budgeting reasons could be able to afford a return.   Wesley   Mouse  23:38, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah but I think the decision was made partly with Swedish SVT as the EBU had already figured out that Sweden would probably win. Or atleast they held discussion on it with SVT within hours of Loreens win. Because I have read that it was partly a decision by the now Swedish organizers and the EBU to keep it smaller and on a budget for 2013. But anyway I support that 100% as I think Eurovision itself can be made just as good with about 50 million in budget as to Azerbaijans budget in 2012 of 400 million.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Currency issues? If "400,000,000" is in AZM then in Euros that's 415,000,000. Similarly, there's a bigger difference between Krona and Euros. And let's not bring GBP into this! Spa-Franks (talk) 10:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that like the article for Eurovision Song Contest 2011 we should have a sub section within the "Venue" section for these things. No need for an entirely new section, It should definitely be mentioned though. --Reckless182 (talk) 10:44, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't use Eurovision Song Contest 2011 as an example for layout at the moment. That article is in the old layout, and has yet to be reformatted.  A discussion took place at WT:ESC in regards to article layouts, and are slowly being rolled out.  So far I have managed to reformat 1956 - 1975, as well as 2012 and 2013.  1976 - 2011 and the JESC ones are still to be done.  The template is in one of my sandboxes, can't remember which off-hand.  I had done so well to get the first batch reformatted so quickly, but now that my precious time is being consumed with Olympic duties, that time is becoming harder to find.   Wesley   Mouse  14:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Found those pages in my sandbox that I spoke about. Eurovision and Junior Eurovision; and all the location maps that are being used in the venue sections can be found here. <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 14:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh right. You'll have to excuse a newbie like me, I wasn't aware of the layout changes. Thank you for linking to the layout examples. Hopefully we can expand the article when more information is released. --<b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC"><b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">Reckless182</b> <b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">(talk)</b></b> 18:53, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have read a number of article's about the choice of arena and I am of the impression that SVT and EBU are in a agreement for a smaller arena etc for ESC 2013 and not for the long run. So if for example Russia wins in next year in Malmö they will decide if they want to do a big arrangement for ESC 2014 and so on.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Israeli embassy raises concern
Today the Israeli embassy in Sweden has requested that Malmö city makes sure that no protests and attacks against Israels delegation are done by possible protesters during Eurovision and especially if Israel would qualify for the final. This after the protests against Israels game against Sweden in Davis cup in 2009 in Malmö. Also Malmö is a city with a huge Muslim population which will make Israels participation more risky then usual I guess. Here is the link to the news. Perhaps worth a mention in the article as Israel hasn't asked officially about more security like this before for several years. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Under "Notable incidents"? <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 20:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sound's good.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I might be a bit biased since I'm a current resident of the city, However let's make sure that we get this as objective as possible. Many people feel strongly about these issues and the issues tend to be over dramatized in the evening newspapers. I definitely think that the issue is worth mentioning but I would prefer a better source than Aftonbladet which can be biased and over dramatic at times. --<b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC"><b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">Reckless182</b> <b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">(talk)</b></b> 20:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ahh seeing as you're a local (of Malmö I'm assuming) then I would trust your judgement of that site then. Best leave the inclusion on hold for now until a better and more reliable source publishes details.  Otherwise we could have a repeat of the "Human Right" style debate that occurred this year.  <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 20:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * More neutral and objective references would be Sydsvenskan, DN and Svenska Dagbladet for example. I've failed to find this piece of news on any of these. --<b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC"><b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">Reckless182</b> <b style="color:white; background:#6A9AFC">(talk)</b></b> 21:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that when we are covering more important stories like this one we should have more reliable sources. Atleast lets wait and see if sites like Esctoday.com covers it.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Czech Republic
Just saw on EurovisionTimes that the Czech Republic won't be back in 2013. They should be colored yellow on the map.74.131.99.14 (talk) 09:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I notice that the Czech Republic is coloured yellow, but I can't find any source in the article indicating that they have actually decided not to participate. The latest article on the topic on Escdaily.org from 20 July says that no decision is made yet, just as the article states. Aejsing (talk) 09:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Its probably someone who has jumped the gun and coloured the map without checking the article/sources. Easily .  <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 10:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Czech TV said, that they are not interesting in upcoming Eurovision and they will not broadcast it. Of course, they can change their mind till December, but who will believe in it? CT never said, that they made no decision yet. The article on Escdaily is crap. If you want, I can find for you the article about decision of CT, but it will be in Czech. Just tell me. 78.136.191.17 (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately you are incorrect there. One source reported that CT had allegedly said "no".  But several other more reliable sources have all reported that CT has informed them that they haven't made any decisions yet and the report stating they won't return is a lie.  So on that basis we need to go with the majority sources that are all collaborating the same details.  <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 23:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * LOL, important is, what CT said, and sorry, but I live in Czech republic and I know, what they said, like all people in Czech Rep. CT never said, that they lied, about our no-return. They said, that they are not interesting in Malmö, that's all. But if you want to have here craps from Greek and Turkish teenagers from crap-sites like Escdaily, who only wants to be interesting, you are welcome. It is sad, that you believe only in English-language sources here and not in only true sources (national broadcasters), because they don't write it in English. 78.136.153.235 (talk) 11:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Considering that this is an English language Wikipedia, then English language sources would be preferred for the purpose of maintaining verified, reliable content. Just because a person lives in a country, they cannot and shouldn't decide what a source or organisation will and will not do - that would be original research not to mention expressing a one-sided point of view which goes against neutrality of Wikipedia standards.  There were sources that stated Czech Republic would not return, but then other reliable sources where released afterwards by CT themselves stating they had never reported any decision of a no-return and were still in private talks with the broadcast executives whether or not to return.  And please be careful of the tone in which you post comments, as they could be perceived as attacking towards other users and/or organisations.  <b style="background:black"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 11:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * And just for the record, the reporter at ESCDaily isn't a "crap Greek/Turkish teenager" as you rudely described them. The reporters name is Konstantin Kirilov, from Bulgaria.  The only two sources that explicitly state a no-return are from blog websites escwebs and escportal - using those as a source would violate WP:BLOGS.  <b style="background:black"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 11:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This discussion is very funny. If you have Czech article about no-return of Czech Republic with information by director of Czech TV, it is not enough for you? By the way, ESCPortal is only Czech Eurovision website with 5-years history, certified informations and huge popularity in Czech Republic and Slovakia among Eurovision fans. They had decision of Czech TV director about no-return in July. ESCdaily had article about no decision without names, sources... If you want to write about participation of European countries, you must use local websites, they are in contact with local stations. Now you have the same answer on ESCtoday and you immedieately added Czech Rep. in no-participating countries. It is funny, English is the only language in the world and only info in this language has a quality? Don't be funny, dear Wikipedia friends. This Czech story is only one of many examples of your English "dominance". 83.208.42.218 (talk) 08:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The policy on this project is to use reliable sources not local sources, with secondary sources being preferred over primary ones. It is always correct to be sceptical about sources of which we are not familiar, as the obligation is on those adding content to know/show that the source they are using is reliable, and what fans think is reliable is not necessarily what this project thinks is reliable. It is also right to be sceptical about sources which are not in English since machine translations usually have to be used to verify what an editor says they say, and they have been disastrously wrong in the past. At the end of the day, this is the English language Wikipedia, so as per WP:NOENG, English language sources are preferred here without apology. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 10:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Serbia
According to Swedish Wikipedia Serbia will participate in 2013. Aejsing (talk) 12:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Swedish Wikipedia and English Wikipedia tend to operate differently. We use reliable sources to make sure that all content is verified and as accurate to the true facts as possible.  Our colleagues over at Swedish Wikipedia may me a little more relaxed with sources.  I have just checked the source that Swedish Wikipedia and it appears to be a blogsite.  And according to English Wiki policies at WP:BLOGS and Blogs as sources they are most frowned upon as they are not always reliable enough to be used.  Hope this answers your question, regards <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 15:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, thank you. Aejsing (talk) 18:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * But now they are coloured purple on the map. I've tried to google "Serbia Eurovision 2013", but I can't find any articles other than the blogsite mentioned above. Could it be there is an article in Seriban confirming their participation? Aejsing (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the file, and asked the user to provide a source. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 22:15, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's been added again with the following source: http://www.eurovision-contest.eu/8/post/2012/05/switzerland-serbia-and-ireland-confirms-2013-participation.html=www.eurovision-contest.eu I'm dubious though. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 13:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Which is the same source previously used for the Swedish article.Aejsing (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Is it a reliable source the reference that confirms the participation of Serbia? There aren't more sources in other sites. (Sorry for my bad english). Thank you JoseDLG (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

The review of the source which I had undertaken back in July was incorrect. The layout of the website appeared to be like a blogger, but it seems the website has been used on other articles too. The page is operated by an editorial team, similar to how ESCToday and ESCDaily have a contracted editorial team. Eurovision-contest.eu is also included on the list that the EBU published a few months ago as "websites" that are reliable with their news. <b style="background:black"> Wesley  Mouse </b> 18:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your answer. Sorry for moving the thread of Serbia to a new location. JoseDLG (talk) 21:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Croatia
Croatia has said to ESCDaily.com that they're participating so you can put in Croatia. Here is the link: http://www.escdaily.com/malmo-2013-croatia-confirms-participation-in-eurovision-2013/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.200.166.7 (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ - thank you for supplying the information. <b style="background:#807241"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 14:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Lithuania
Here you go: http://www.escdaily.com/malmo-2013-lithuania-will-participate-in-2013/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.212.224.149 (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Malta
Malta may be paticipating due to an editorial report on escXtra.com so i guess you may wanna highlight the country :) Link:http://escxtra.com/2012/08/who-should-represent-malta-in-malmo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.177.145 (talk • contribs)
 * Really nothing confirming them, just a fantasy who should. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 16:06, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Look at this
Take a look at this AfD for a Eurovision related article on Suntribe. Users with Eurovision knowledge needed here.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Take a look at The Mullans too.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Armenia
It needs to be mentioned somewhere outside the lead and infobox (which only summarize the article) that Armenia are returning, although there doesn't seem to be agreement on where this should go. I prefer having it in participating countries, as Armenia is participating, and the other countries section has previously only included countries that aren't or aren't yet participating. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not bothered either way to be honest. It makes sense to have it with the 'participating countries' section, but with the resent edit wars and people removing it without stating a valid reason I placed it within the 'other countries' section in a BRD move - see if people would pipe up with better suggestions.  Only other solution is to get this back on semi-protect again - we didn't have much hassle with IPs trying to engage in silent edit wars when it last got semi'd - and we're basically going down the same route as last time which gave the reason for the 2 x semis this and JESC 2012 articles previously had.  <b style="background:black"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 19:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * With the exception of the one edit warring today, I don't think IP edits have been particularity problematic, making semi-protection difficult to justify at this time. Since there doesn't seem to be any real disagreement here, I'm removing Armenia from the other countries section and leaving it with participants. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

MGP final to be on February 9th
MGP final of the Norwegian selection process, is to be held on February 9th.

Source - http://12points.tv/esc-news/ooh-aah-just-a-little-news/item/1081-oa-%7C-first-signals-for-2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.249.146.48 (talk) 06:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Serioulsy, mods. Why not even bother commenting back? (I'm not the man behind the previous message.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.164.245.90 (talk) 09:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Think logical please. We do all have real-life commitments too.  We all don't just sit here 24/7 waiting to respond to IP questions.  Wikipedia consists of voluntary contributions, anyone can contribute to the encyclopaedia.  However, this article has seen high frequency vandalism from random IP accounts, hence why it is protected.  Feel free to create a registered account, and that way you will be able to update the article too.  Plus, I'm not 100% sure if the source is reliable enough - it looks a little bit bloggy.   Wesley ♦Mouse 12:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

http://www.nrk.no/programmer/tv/melodi_grand_prix/1.8322432 From the official NRK site. :)You're welcome — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.167.201.203 (talk) 06:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Source for Belgium
I've made a Google translation of the source used for Belgium, and it seems to be focused primarily on ESC 2014. In the translation it's unclear to me whether they have actually made a decision about 2013, but maybe I'm wrong? Aejsing (talk) 13:23, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The second paragraph in the source states that RTBF will be dealing with 2013 selection process for Belgium. The article is also stating that VRT will be organising the selection process for 2014.  So in reality the source itself is confirming that Belgium will be present in Eurovision for the next two editions at least.  <b style="background:black"> Wesley   Mouse </b> 13:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok fair enough. They should be coloured on the map then. Aejsing (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia & Herzegovina will competing in this Eurovision Song Contest! That was writing so on the Swedish Wikipedia (im comming from Sweden).


 * ❌ - 1) we don't check other language Wikipedias just to see what details they hold. You'll find each operate differently to others.  2) we need a reliable soucre to verify that Bosnia are confirmed.  Thanks, 16:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

No Liechenstein in 2013!
According ESCToday there are no countries that have never competed in the Eurovision Song Contest before that will be able to join the EBU in order to compete in 2013. They say: ''We shall concentrate on the 49 currently existing countries that have so far taken part at least once in the Eurovision Song Contest. There have been no indications that another one of the active members of the European Broadcasting Union EBU would want to join the contest. '''There are neither any new EBU members this year, and the next time EBU will consider new active members in January will be too late for 2013. So under current Eurovision Song Contest rules it is very unlikely that a new country could enter the contest in Malmö.' (source: ESCToday 15 September 2012). Therefore, I think that Liechtenstein should be removed from the current list as a possible debutante in 2013. /Hollac16 (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah shame, or well here's hoping Morocco make a come back or Lebanon. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 21:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Forgive me but there is no list of any possible return/débutantes whatsoever. There is a section on other countries which is designed to provide information on any Eurovision nation or any nation who is still eligible to become an EBU member - of which Liechtenstein is one.   Wesley ♦Mouse 12:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Georgia
Accordin to ESCToday, Georgia will be in Malmö http://www.esctoday.com/?p=37525 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.164.245.90 (talk) 08:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 September 2012
Moldova and Georgia have also confirmed participation to Eurovision 2013. Source esctoday.com

M.woody:79 (talk) 10:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Please provide the source. Found the sources myself, its OK.  Will update article accordingly.   Wesley ♦Mouse 12:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Monaco
Monaco is not gonna be in Malmo. The link is here :) = http://www.esctoday.com/?p=37643 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.204.97 (talk) 10:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ - Been added to the article, thank you!  Wesley ♦Mouse 12:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Ukraine
The source for the Ukraine participation says "An official confirmation regarding Ukraine’s participation at the Eurovision Song Contest is expected in due course." Thus, it is not official and NOT confirmed. There is no reason to include it here before a confirmation comes. --Hansbaer (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well instead of deleting it entirely. Why didn't you just move Ukraine to the "Other countries" section and write something to state they may be present but not made a decision yet - seeing as there is a reliable source that confirms this, it constitutes an inclusion in the article.   Wesley ♦Mouse 20:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Good point. Sorry I missed that. I will enter it there. --Hansbaer (talk) 20:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * No worries. Some forget that "other countries" doesn't just include withdrawn/non-returning countries, but may also include countries who have stated they may participate but have yet to make a final decision.  Plus looking on the article history, your actions were showing signs of the start of an edit war between yourself and anyone who reinserts Ukraine into the article.  Please be advised that edit warring is a blockable violation, just wanted to make you aware of that so that you don't wander down the wrong path.     Wesley ♦Mouse 20:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not so well informed about the habits in the English Wikipedia. I was aware of the edit war problem, but the other user reverted my edit without any given reason. I would have stopped in a next round, but felt enabled to make that one revert. The other user has not complained or made any further edits. So I suppose he assumed vandalism and reverted it for that reason. --Hansbaer (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Normally it is advised that if you remove something and then someone else replaces it back, that you would open a discussion on the article talk page to find out why, rather than removing it again.  Wesley ♦Mouse 20:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like Turkey has been "discoloured" on the map instead of Ukraine. Regards Aejsing (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)