The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Delete all With the exeption of hypothetical concepts such as
World War III, we should not have articles about something that doesn't exist. However the Kazakhstan one claims that there are plans for them to enter so if we can find a ref for that it might be ok.
BUC (
talk)
11:31, 9 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete all per nom. I've never understood the reasoning behind creating articles like "Vatican City cardinals who are Southern Baptists" or "Living murder victims" for the purpose of demonstrating an empty category.
Mandsford (
talk)
16:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment: Its really strange that some of them were made by an IP on the talk page and then moved to the mainspace by an editor with good intentions. I've never seen that happen before and its weird since this IP seems to have gotten around the registering to create a page.
Grk1011 (
talk)
16:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete all for reasons given above, unless more significant coverage is found. It is not appropriate to have articles for every country that could participate but has not done so; countries that have expressed a clear interest in joining but have not yet participated can be treated differently, but none of these meet that definition.
Camaron | Chris(talk)19:40, 9 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Keep all. As someone who is more interested in politics than music, I actually find the articles on why these countries never participated in the contest more interesting than an article about a country that entered the so-and-so song and came in 14th place. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)03:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment: Interesting point, but does that mean that I should write the article "United States in the Eurovision Song Contest" with a few paragraphs about how the US is not a member of the EBU and therefore cannot participate?
Grk1011 (
talk)
03:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Some Arab countries refuse to participate because they would be forced to show Israeli singers. I don't think the reasons for the US non-participation are as interesting. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)04:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Delete all - although I accept the point that the political aspect of those countries not participating is worth documenting. That can usefully done within an existing article, or a new one created for that purpose.
AnthonyUK (
talk)
14:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
May I point out that unlike "peru in the eurovision song contest", australia in the... "United states.." these countries CAN and are ALLOWED to participate, its just they will not. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
91.84.211.112 (
talk)
15:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.