Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libya in the Eurovision Song Contest

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.

The result was delete all. Wizardman 03:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Libya in the Eurovision Song Contest[edit]

Country has never participated in the contest and article even reads that they have no intention to. Grk1011 (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

Delete them all. There is no reason to have an article about a country not entered in a contest. Ridiculous. Aleta ^Sing 04:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Nick Dowling (talk) 06:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is it not worth merging them all to one article? D B D 07:40, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We merged what was reasonable into List_of_countries_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest#Unsuccessful_attempts_to_participate since those countries actually attempted. Its useless to have a page that says "country" is a member of the EBU so it could participate in the Eurovision Song Contest if it wanted to. Grk1011 (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Comment: Kazakhstan just says that it wants to join the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) which it has to do before entering the contest and just because it may join eventually it does not have anything to do with the contest. Grk1011 (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Greekboy (talk) 13:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all unless sources are found. What's next, Peru in the Eurovision Song Contest? Bart133 ^{t c @ How's my driving?} 14:24, 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]
Delete per Mandsford. Essentially empty articles, why do we need these? The countries in question clearly have no intent of participating in Eurovision, and that's all the pages tell us. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 16:31, 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. --brew crewer (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. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I wrote Lebanon in the Eurovision Song Contest, you may be interested. If you want to proofread too, that would be great because I want to get it up to GA status. Grk1011 (talk) 12:13, 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.