This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 2 months ago66 comments9 people in discussion
There are two discussions I think should be had:
Wouldn't it make sense to have the automatic finalists in a different shade of green compared to the rest of the competing countries? Especially after one semi-final ends and the other one is yet to happen, it will seem as if only 5 countries didn't qualify on the map, and the map doesn't have any indication that more countries are yet to be eliminated.
Why are non-qualifiers red, and non-participants yellow? Red seems like a much harsher color, and if we're already doing a traffic light-inspired coloring, shouldn't finalists be green, non-finalists yellow and non-participants red (or perhaps some other color that doesn't catch the eye that easily)?
2. I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I can understand why non-qualifiers are red, as it is often seen as an opposite color of green, and these are often used as a pair differentiating a "success" or "failure". Thomediter (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
I think these are all valid points, and I could definitely get behind tweaking the colour scheme somewhat to make it clearer and/or less harsh on the eyes. The "pre-qualified" colour does make a lot of sense heading into the contest itself, and for that phase between semis it would make sense to have a differentiating colour for countries in the final, countries still to take part and countries eliminated. While we're at it, given the symbolism of the red, amber, green colours for traffic light systems etc., should we have a go at changing it away entirely from this system? Looking at other maps where countries compete and there are qualifying system, such as UEFA Euro 2020, 2022 FIFA World Cup and 2023 Rugby World Cup, blue is used for qualifiers and yellow for eliminated countries, so potentially not using green and red in our maps at all could be helpful from a "bias" perspective. Could the following colour scheme potentially work?
Blue for competing countries (1956-2003) and finalists (2004-present)
Pink for non-qualifying countries (2004-present) - not sure if this is too close to red though?
Yellow for non-participating countries that previously competed
Purple for countries competing but have not selected their entrant/song
Grey for non-participants with no prior participation history as a sovereign state
While we're talking about maps, I'd like to bring up a previous discussion around maps which was never resolved. There are some discrepancies on the map that need fixing, so if anyone has the necessary SVG skills to help while we're also changing colours that would be fab! Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I think that looks good! I wasn't sure if keeping green for semi-finalists was the right call, and I actually forgot to include a colour for them in my scheme, but I think it works well. Open to other suggestions though if we want to keep brainstorming another colour scheme. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I would change:
Countries competing in the final (selected their entrant/song)
Countries competing in the semi-finals (selected their entrant/song)
Countries eliminated in the semi-finals
Countries that haven't selected their entrant/song
Countries that participated in the past
I think the contrasting yellow color grabs all the attention. I'd rather not use it at all. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 15:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I tend to agree, I would keep yellow for consistency sake, but make it lighter/less saturated
Countries competing in the final
Countries competing in semi-finals
Countries eliminated in semi-finals
Countries that haven't selected their entrant/song
Countries that participated in the past but will not in 2025
I would avoid using two different shades of grey for the non-participants, but I think having a lighter shade of yellow would be a better option. I can see your point around there being a high contrast leading to focus shifting to the yellow. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
The grey color is already used in the winners map. I don't see a problem with a different grey color. The participants in the past are not that important so a darker grey should be fine. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 16:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
True, we should just use that darker grey for non-participants, and the light one for non-ESC countries — IмSтevantalk 17:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah on reflection I'm happy enough with this colour scheme with the dark grey. There's enough distinction between countries which have and have not participated in the past. The only minor qualm I would have is the current light grey shade makes it quite difficult to see borders between non-participating countries, so potentially another shade which isn't quite as light but also is distinguishable enough from the dark grey would be preferable. I'm thinking mainly here about maps for early contests where the number of competing countries is a lot fewer. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I made them both a bit darker — IмSтevantalk 17:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
It does look better but I insist that known finalists should be green. Blue color makes country participation in the final uncertain (as it's meant to be for the semi-finlists).
Also I think the current color shades are not set in stone and can be changed in the discussion. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 17:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
@Smthngnw: Why do you believe that blue shades makes participation uncertain? The key would explicitly state that blue to signify countries that have pre-qualified, and following the semi-finals all countries in the final. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
It feels like green countries are more advanced in participation than the blue ones. And especially compared to the red ones. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 17:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
How so exactly? From my perspective, especially if you're looking at it from a traffic light rating system, blue can mean "complete", which obviously is further advanced than green, which would be "in progress". This is again why I wanted to get away from the whole "green is good, red is bad" perspective that the current colour scheme has, but I just don't know what other colour we could use the signify the semi-finalists. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Blue and green colors definitely should be switched up, it looks wrong like User:Smthngnw said. And I don’t see why change the colors so soon when only 1 or 2 other users have shown they approval for it Purpley24 (talk) 02:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
I know this might complicate everything, but there is one additional point I would like to bring up. In, for example, the Eurovision 2024 map, Ukraine is competing, whereas Russia is not. Therefore, the two countries are in separate colours. However, the disputed territory of Crimea is shaded in Ukraine’s colour. Could this be brought in conflict with WP:NPOV? - delta (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
The vast majority of countries and territories support Ukraine's claim over territorial integrity in Crimea, including at the United Nations. I don't believe therefore that there is an NPOV violation in this case to place Crimea as part of Ukraine. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 15:10, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Alright then. - delta (talk) 15:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I should note that we should also be careful when picking colors and taking color blindness into account. Here are the 4 colors we're using now — IмSтevantalk 17:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I fixed the map and the colors to take that into account. Now people with protanopia, deuteranopia, or tritanopia could read the map properly
Countries competing in the final
Countries competing in semi-finals
Countries eliminated in semi-finals
Countries that haven't selected their entrant/song
Countries that participated in the past but will not in 2025
I'd like to see how the map looks further advanced in the competition, e.g. in-between the two semis, just so we can see all colours in action. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
While I completely support ensuring the colours are distinguishable for those with colour blindness, this list of colours goes back to that whole green and red dichotomy, which as I mentioned above I personally would like to avoid completely. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Red and green are actually two colors that can cause trouble for those with color blindness, blue and red are a great match. Furthermore, even during those 2 days that red and green both exist, they are distinguishable even for those with color blindness — IмSтevantalk 18:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I do have one problem tho... if dark grey is withdrew and light grey is never competed... which color is no data/no confirmation nor withdrawal — IмSтevantalk 18:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Added a new color for the pre-participants list map — IмSтevantalk 18:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I think this colour scheme works really well. It balances the need for inclusion and helps to remove the biases around red and green a little bit. I think the salmon colour works pretty well too, to separate countries at which won't be there before the final participation list has been announced and provide an overview at a glance. I'm wondering if going for yellow for non-qualifiers would be a better option, I'm not sure how that would work from a colour blindness perspective, but then we could move completely away from red-green. Thoughts? Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't see the need to move away from red, it is after all considered a negative color (and non-qualifying is not a good thing) — IмSтevantalk 19:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
The blue finalists as I saw on the recent examples without yellow color are looking good. The FIFA maps use the blue-best, green-good, yellow-mid and red-worst for the result. I'd like to keep this blue-green-red palette for countries as these colors aren't seem to be random and have a consistency and gradation. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 19:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Mentioning withdrawals from the next contest complicates the map. "Participated in the past" is already self-sufficient clarification. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 19:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
It would take the role of dark grey early on to indicate which countries have no interest in returning, while dark grey would just be the default map color. When the list of participants comes out, the color is removed and every non-competing country is colored grey. See the first 2 pics above — IмSтevantalk 19:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
The interest is not relevant. Only a broadcaster conformation and EBU participation list should be included. If the conformation list is empty then the map should consist of the "participated in the past" dark grey and non-participated light grey countries. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 19:16, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
That would be similar to what we do now, where we only colour in countries which have declined to participate in the event when they announce so or when the participation list drops. I think the situation with Romania this year is such a rare case that possibly creating a whole new category for that would be too much hassle. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for tagging me, I hadn’t checked the page for a while. I really like this change and the color shades as well! Let’s just keep in mind to have separate files for the English Wikipedia or to extend the discussion cross-wiki. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I guess this time round we'd have a different file, and by 2025 other projects would catch up — IмSтevantalk 20:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, I actually like this change of color scheme. The main issue of making a distinction between finalists and semi-finalists, especially for only two days, doesn't seem that bad to me, but that's a personal opinion and I can see why it could pose a problem so... to me it's actually good. The only thing I find weird is getting countries colored only to have them go back to grey later. If I understand correctly, every country that has already participated to ESC starts in a dark shade of grey, some get colored to confirm they're in, some to confirm they're out, and the latter go back to grey in the end ? That's essentially putting a color to say "waiting info", so same discussion as a few months ago. But eh, I don't mind grey, it's lighter so why not. Yoyo360 (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much for tagging me and for using a colour scheme that helps improve the accessibility of the maps for people who are colour blinded. I am definitely in favour of changing the colours and believe this will give more clarity to the maps. Here's some feedback I have on the colours:
Changing the colour of countries that participated in the past to dark grey is a great idea. I do believe, however, that there is no need for the additional colour for countries who have confirmed their non-participation before the full list of participants is announced. Echoing what @Smthngnw mentioned, "Countries that participated in the past" is already self-sufficient clarification.
I think we should use an even lighter grey for countries that have never participated in ESC, like the one in the winners map as I don't think the two shades of grey are different enough. Specifically looking at Greenland as an example, it's kind of hard to tell which grey is being used.
I think that the blue label should specifically be "Competing countries in the final" for 2004 onwards rather than just "Competing countries", otherwise it could be interpreted that "Countries eliminated in semi-finals" are not considered competing countries, which would only be true for the pre-qualification round of 1996.
Lastly I just wanted to ensure this change only effects en-wikipedia? Will we ensure we have a seperate file to use as I believe other language wikipedias will require to have their own discussion should they want to implement this change.
Okay but how would you differentiate countries with no data and countries that won't compete — IмSтevantalk 10:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Specifically on your shades of grey comment, earlier examples did have a lighter shade but this made it difficult to identify the borders between countries which had never competed. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
My bad, I noticed that Greenland was mistakenly coloured with a different grey which caused my confusion. In regards to differentiating countries with no data and countries that won't compete I still think that's not that important, however, I'm not heavily against it if the consensus is that we should include that data on the map. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 12:12, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Automatic-finalist and semi-finalist countries without a performer/song both are the same color, but when they select they change into two different colors. Maybe pink or another color should be distributed for the automatic-finalists? I'd like to keep the countries without a performer/song out of the blue-to-green-to-red grade and close to the current dark purple color. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 21:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
The map would probably get too messy — IмSтevantalk 21:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree, I think having an extra colour that will only affect max six countries is unnecessary. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I added the change to the Template sandbox. The new values are BlueSelected, GreenSelected, Salmon (3 values used before the list of participants is out; used with Purple), Map ListOut (after the list), Map EverybodyPicked (mid March), Map AfterSF1, Map Final. The last 4 are there to simplify things by having one value display everything that's necessary rather than activating the legend one value at a time — IмSтevantalk 21:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Those would get to keep their values, I purposefully didn't tamper with the old values for that very reason — IмSтevantalk 22:12, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
We could potentially revisit those colour schemes as well to make then more consistent with the main maps (i.e. blue to participants/finalists). Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Also, why are the Faroe Islands showing on the new 2022 but not others ? Also, why are they even shown ? Yoyo360 (talk) 17:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah I don't agree with framing the Faroe Islands like this. The framing is only done in cases where the country would be too small to identify normally and where we enlarge the image as well, which isn't being done here either. Additionally there is no Faroese broadcaster within the EBU yet. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Also I don't know what is up with the new 2022 file but I'm unable to overwrite it with a new version. ImStevan? Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: If help is needed, I have Inkscape and can pretty easily take the older maps to help you change the color scheme. Yoyo360 (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I have created a new template file at File:Eurovision events Map 2.svg, which should be used going forwards when creating the maps. Old versions have some discrepancies in country borders and shapes, so to avoid that use this file. And if anyone needs to make any underlying changes to the file for any other fixes that aren't just changing colours they should also make the same changes to this file to ensure that they can be replicated going forward on all files. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:52, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Honestly I'm having second thoughts on the blue/green debate... perhaps green IS the way to go — IмSтevantalk 18:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Would you have blue then as the colour for the semi-finalists? Honestly I think blue for finalists, green for semi-finalists up until the contest and then red for non-qualified acts is the best solution. As has been established above, green-red combinations cause issues for people with colour blindness, so I would rather there be as few cases of overlapping green and red in the maps long-term as possible. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 19:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
You're right, I'm probably just used to the flashy colors of the old palette — IмSтevantalk 19:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree, green makes much more sense for finalists. The shade of red used is also not very pleasing to the eyes. Purpley24 (talk) 23:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
The shading of red used works very well with the blue as the finalists in my opinion, and as established already, this is the best option for people with various forms of colour blindness. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 06:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree. The shades seem to go very well with each other and I dare say they look even more pleasing to the eye than the ones of the previous scheme. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 07:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
It'd be more convenient to keep the progress bar of elimination rounds similar to FIFA World Cup. If there's a need of any other rounds like in American Song Contest, the colors in use can be expanded according to the current color scheme. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 00:27, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
It seems those are more colors (and more similarly-looking) than we need here though, so I believe it’s more convenient to keep the current scheme with a neater distinction among the shades used. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 07:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
One question for everyone saying "green is better/makes more sense etc.", do you feel this way only because that's what you're used to seeing, or do you have any logical reason that you'd like to share other than your own personal opinion? As has been bought up repeatedly, green-red combinations are notoriously difficult for colour blind people, so logically why would we want to make people's lives more difficult? I know there were no complaints necessarily before about it, but I would concur with the comments from Aris and Ivan that the blue and red combo works really well, and is a lot less overwhelming compared to the previous green-red-yellow scheme. My advice would be to give it time, there have been a lot of different things happening across our articles lately and I personally believe they are all for the best. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 09:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
@ImStevan: Just noticed you had altered the colour scheme slightly. I had been in the middle of creating a bunch of maps, so a lot of them are up with the original darker colours. Figured best to raise the discussion here about this too. Personally I prefer the darker colours, I found the brighter colours a bit too garish in my opinion, but also happy to discuss if anyone has any other opinions on this. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 13:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Same here, I prefer the less flashy colors. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 13:38, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Imagemap Highlight
Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion
Eurovision maps of Russian Wikipedia using this code highlight countries on hover and create a list of links below. I'd like to have this feature on English Wikipedia too. What do you think about it?
To be able to test it out in English Wikipedia you should:
One problem I can see straight away is that the highlighting is applicable to all countries, whether they are participating or not. The links we have on our maps link to the specific country-by-year articles, so we would need to modify the code to highlight only those countries that are participating in each year's contest. The code is also not perfect because instead of highlighting the outline of Australia it instead highlights the entire callout box. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Ngl I would like the highlight to do the entire box regarding microstates, it's really hard to click on Monaco — IмSтevantalk 13:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I find this unnecessary. My question would be how does this add anything useful? On desktop when you hover your mouse over a country it shows the name of the article it's linking to. On mobile while that's not the case, seeing as you can't hover anyways, does it really add anything? Additionally, referring to MOS:DL, I don't see how adding a list of links below the map would help the readers. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 07:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Other countries before official list
Latest comment: 2 months ago6 comments4 people in discussion
Grk1011 and I are in disagreement at Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2024 regarding the inclusion of provisional info for countries that are not yet confirmed; afaik we have been including that at least in recent years. Opinions? ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 00:37, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
False hopes, gossips, guesses, predictions are all irrelevant. Only official confirmation of participation in the corresponding contest must matter. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 01:10, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree. However, for the two countries listed so far (Estonia and North Macedonia) there have been public statements/releases by the broadcasters themselves, that’s my main focus. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
We (meaning others included as well) have had this similar conversation many times over and it's exhausting to have to rehash it on each article with you. Wikipedia has policies on WP:SPECULATION. If a source says "this may happen" or "this will happen only if this x, y, and z happen", it is likely not appropriate to mention unless it is almost certain to. Details about a future confirmed event are fine (that's what ESC 2024 and JESC 2024) are after all, but saying "so and so is thinking about something" is inappropriate and I believe the guidelines are clear that it cannot be included. Wikipedia is not here to spread news or to be a place for people to find out the current status of every tangential aspect of the contest; it records things that have already happened. With respect to Estonia, that article just says that they intend to look into some changes if they compete; for North Macedonia, a reporter found a line item in a state budget and then wrote an article about it. None of these have reached the threshold for serious consideration. Grk1011 (talk) 14:15, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't see how including info coming from the broadcasters themselves would go against WP:SPECULATION. We're not speculating that the broadcaster is considering participation, we have a source that backs that up. Regarding North Macedonia specifically, why should we not include the information that there is a line in the state budget referring to JESC participation? We're not speculating that there is a line, it's a fact. And I strongly disagree that Wikipedia is only to record things that have already happened. If that were the case, we would only create the JESC article after the contest is held. The line being placed in the state budget has already been placed there, whether provisionally or not, it should still be mentioned. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 07:50, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
The speculation is about participation, not that the information exists. Having a whole section of maybes, including those that are not official announcements, but rather synthesis (drawing conclusions not stated in the source) by journalists or editors, isn't something that I've see elsewhere on Wiki. In the past, I've see the concerning cycle of adding a bunch of misleading interest statements based on a past year's participant's comments, or a tv host's remarks, etc., only for them to not take part and we just delete the information as "oh well, maybe next year". We really need to tighten up this section if we want these articles to continue to move up the quality chain to GA, FA, or what have you. Grk1011 (talk) 14:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Withdrawal confirmations
Latest comment: 2 months ago15 comments6 people in discussion
So currently, Nordic countries confirmed they won't be present at JESC 2024, however they are colored the same way as countries that stated nothing related to competing. Any ideas on how to adress this? — IмSтevantalk 11:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
There is no such thing as withdrawing; they opted to not take part this year. I think that makes them the same as the others that aren't taking part. It can make sense mentioning that they took place the prior year in prose, but I don't feel that it's relevant for the map. Grk1011 (talk) 14:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
But they are the same color as countries that didn't state anything and might or might not compete — IмSтevantalk 14:05, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I guess I don't understand why that's bad. Not competing and saying you're not competing are the same end result. Grk1011 (talk) 14:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I think it's better to specify withdrawal in the map as something that only occur if a country that qualified in the semi-final decided not to participate in the final. If a country didn't qualify and didn't bother to vote in the final it is still not withdrawing as it's the entry that participates, not the voters. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 16:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe utilizing red is a good idea? — IмSтevantalk 15:11, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I think the pale pink works just fine, we already use red for non-qualifiers. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 18:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I personally don't see the need for this. I don't feel that we need a different colour for every single eventuality of a country's participation in the event, especially as with the current JESC stage where confirmations are coming from a variety of sources, both reliable and unreliable. Too many colours makes the map more illegible and detracts from what should be a quick overview and not the main source of information. All this information can be much more easily explained in prose within the article. Sims2aholic8 (talk) Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Whilst I agree on the sentiment, seeing on the which countries are certainly not going to compete is useful — IмSтevantalk 11:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't understand where the "at least once" group came from or why that is important. Isn't it covered by the other one? If this is just a temporary map until the final list of participants is announced, then I'd say don't bother with these seemingly arbitrary groupings. Are sources separating them like this? Remember that you'll need a source for anything in the map. Grk1011 (talk) 14:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
These were exactly the questions I had as well. From what I can tell it's an attempt to split the "non-participating countries" into those that have said anything about the current contest and those that haven't, and yes I believe it would be a temporary thing, and they would all go back to the dark grey when the participants list is announced. This is why I think it is a really unnecessary feature, because why does it matter if a broadcaster has said they're not taking part? It's putting too much stock in something that is not happening. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 15:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe I'm just looking at this from a fan's perspective where it's useful to see which countries still have a chance of competing and which ones will certainly not. If everybody else agrees we can get rid of the peach/orange color — IмSтevantalk 15:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
While I understand Grk1011 and Sims2aholic8's point, I feel I am more on Stevan's side on this. As long as there's info provided by the broadcasters, it doesn't hurt to have it in the map. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Overall the problem is the to see which countries still have a chance of competing comment. Under no circumstances can we lead readers to believe something that is not stated in the sources. There are websites that might keep track of that, but Wikipedia isn't set up to be a source for news or status updates. As an encyclopedia, we document what happened. To respond to the "doesn't hurt" comment, I think the problem is that even if it were included, it does hurt because we can't figure out how to accurately portray it. Grk1011 (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Wales at JESC
Latest comment: 2 months ago24 comments7 people in discussion
What does everybody think about including Wales on the map of JESC like this (image provided)? — IмSтevantalk 14:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I believe it is a good idea. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:41, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
(Provided we cut out the Russian clickable link in the infobox and create one for Wales.) ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 15:03, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I think the top right side becomes too crammed. Maybe it's better to add a little Wales rectangle nearby the British Isles.
PS: I think the map demonstrates the oceans too much. I'd cut it to Portugal and Iceland in the West, to Norway in the North, to Azerbaijan in the East and kept the same South. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 16:15, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I've updated Eurovision events map with Wales moved 100px to the left out the frame. 𝐒𝐦𝐭𝐡𝐧𝐠𝐧𝐰💬 16:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine with the crop on the east, but I think Greenland should still be on the map. I think we should uncrop it just to avoid link-mapping issues and having to remake all the maps — IмSтevantalk 17:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I think this cropping looks a bit too tight. And let's again not forget that, if we decide to use a new crop, huge edits should be made thoughout all the linked maps as implemented in the infoboxes. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I mapped Wales, but Russia is too complicated for me to unmap it — IмSтevantalk 15:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree that we only need a small Wales icon and have it placed somewhere near the British Isles to also help avoid having to re-map Russia. Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 17:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I remapped Wales. I kept the rest of the UK just so Wales can be recognized as such — IмSтevantalk 17:50, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
That's perfect, well done! Aris Odi❯❯❯talk 18:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, but having two separate panels scatted around the map looks cluttered, they looked much better next to each other. -- AxG/✉ 14:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I think it is fine. In the USA, There are usually two seperate panels like this for Alaska and Hawaii. Ktkvtsh (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes, usually next to each other and placed to the bottom left on most maps, not spaced apart -- AxG/✉ 17:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I find it weird to have an inset that's not an inset (it's the same size). Would recommend a box (maybe with zoom) similar to the microstates. Grk1011 (talk) 16:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
But zooms are placed where the actual microstates are, I don't think that'd work with Wales — IмSтevantalk 16:44, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Here's another example of another insert showing the former-Yugoslavia directly below Australia. -- AxG/✉ 17:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Kazakhstan is barely visible there - and we need it for JESC maps — IмSтevantalk 17:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I'm not saying to add Yugoslavia to a JESC map, I'm just pointing out that a Wales inset was much more neatly placed to the left of Australia, much how this map is also placed together with Australia. AxG/✉ 17:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine with that as long as somebody else remaps the image to remove the Russia link from that part of the map — IмSтevantalk 17:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
That's easy, I did them years ago: User:AxG/sandbox/1. -- AxG/✉ 15:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Moved it back to the corner (JESC2024) and added your code, seems good to me — IмSтevantalk 16:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Shading countries which pulled out late on maps
Latest comment: 2 months ago27 comments5 people in discussion
As part of ImStevan's work to update the Eurovision maps to the new colour scheme, I noted with the 1977 map that Tunisia had been shaded in as a country which were to participate but withdrew at a late stage. Since this hasn't been done before on any maps I thought it would be best to open a discussion on a way forward in this area, as this will have impacts on other maps and in the future. Additionally, if we are to agree to do this going forward, then an agreement on colour is required given that the current purple shade is already in use for current and future contest maps to indicate countries that have been confirmed but have not picked a song/artist. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
As a follow-up, listing below all cases I believe where this new shading might be required, dependent on the specific situations we collectively agree that should utilise this shading: Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Luxembourg 1959 (uncertain on this one but since Luxembourg were included in print media at the time of the contest their non-participation may have been decided late)
Malta 1973
France 1974
Tunisia 1977
Turkey 1979
Greece 1982
Greece 1986
Cyprus 1988
Latvia 1999 (maybe not though since they likely pulled out before the cut-off date)
Lebanon 2005
Serbia and Montenegro 2006
Georgia 2009
Armenia 2012
Romania 2016
Russia 2017
Ukraine 2019
Armenia & Belarus 2021
Russia 2022
Clearly as the person putting this forward I believe it serves its purpose of informing the reader at a glance of participating and non-participating countries. I chose purple simply because if it was red, it would create conflict in future editions with non-qualifiers. Green would feel unfitting as well, whilst purple is a temporary color that could take on this role as well — IмSтevantalk 10:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I can certainly see the purpose for it. I guess my concern would be especially for later years where we already have quite a few colours used whether another colour for another different outcome would be distracting. Using a temporary colour is this manner would probably work most of the time, but taking 2022 as an example, when Russia was excluded before all countries had selected their performers, you would then have a case of the one colour being split across two different scenarios, which would be a confusing situation for the reader. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I see your point. In that scenario, I would've had Russia in grey, and in purple after all countries decided their representatives. If you have a suggestion for a new color I'm all ears, it would certainly make things a whole lot easier (if you even agree that these countries should be labeled) — IмSтevantalk 10:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
If we're doing Tunisia 1977, then Russia 2022, although it wasn't the exact same scenario obviously, would be in the same boat for me, as they are cases of a country that applied to compete, were on the participation list and ultimately did not compete. I believe however that would we need a more catch-all statement for the key; "Announced as a participant, but withdrew before the contest", which was used on the 1977 article, is probably too specific. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Announced as a participant, but ultimately didn't compete at the contest? — IмSтevantalk 11:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I have updated the 2021 and 2022 maps to shade these countries. I went with "Countries that intended to participate but ultimately did not compete" as the legend text, which is similar enough to your suggestion but I believe is more consistent wording with the other colours as it starts with "countries". Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Let's see if others even agree if this should be included before doing more, and let's see if purple is the way to go as it's very similar to blue and red — IмSтevantalk 11:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Okay which color are we thinking? It's highly likely that we'll need this on the 2024 map at the same time with some countries not having selected their entries, which is exactly the issue you brought up with purple — IмSтevantalk 01:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I definitely don't agree with adding one more color for countries that pulled out late. In the end they didn't participate. There's some text explanation in the article. It gets too much very easily. The basic information of the map should be (and was until this discussion started): participating (here in color) or not (here in grey). Secondary info with the blue/red duality is also useful for finalists or not. But one more color is too much, gets confusing, and breaks the color v grey pattern. Besides, the purple definitely is not appropriate as it is too close to both red and blue and is very easily confused (I personally can't differentiate them at first glance, especially for years like 2005, 2006, 2021 or 2022). Anyone looking at the map quickly would consider the purple countries as participating. An they did not. So why highlight something that didn't happen? Yoyo360 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
The point of this map is to highlight participation. Past precedence aside, I'm not sure why it's relevant to indicate whether a country has or has not selected a song yet. Grk1011 (talk) 14:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
So your stance is purple (didn't select entry) shouldn't even be on the maps as it stands right now — IмSтevantalk 14:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes, song selection status has nothing to do with participation status and takes away from the information you're presenting at the same time (semi- and finalists). The purple countries need to also be blue or green at the same time or else the map is incorrect. You're trying to do too much with this summary map. I think we need to pare this back. Grk1011 (talk) 15:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I totally side with @Yoyo360 on this one. I feel like you want to add way too many colors and details, while the purpose of doing so is a bit questionable. Highlighting something that did happen is great and all, but something that didn't happen (i.e. Belarus pulling out late in 2021 in the same way as Lebanon in 2005) doesn't give that much credit to your idea of improving the color scheme of these maps as well as how well information are conveyed through them. WikaysAny questions? 15:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
So is this settled? Purple for those? Because there seems to be some opposition Yoyo360 (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Btw, nice to adopt the name ESC Map 2 for the maps you're uploading but you should keep consistent and do it as well for 2025 and forward, because not all wikis may follow your decisions. Yoyo360 (talk) 16:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I would imagine there will eventually be a tipping point where the majority of Wikis will end up using the same version, but there is no reason multiple maps with different colours can't be created for different Wikis. The main focus of this WikiProject is on how to layout the English Wikipedia Eurovision articles; what happens on other versions of Wikipedia is not the concern of this project. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2024 (UTC).
True but consistency would still be welcome. Yoyo360 (talk) 17:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@ImStevan: I spotted your update to the 2006 map. I don't believe we should be making a special case for Serbia and Montenegro in 2006 just because they retained voting rights. If we decide on a colour for cases where a country was confirmed for the contest but didn't take part then this should apply to all instances, and S&M in 2006 should be no different. Also, I just have to say that it feels a bit disingenuous to be saying here that we shouldn't make any more changes to the maps until there is more discussion, but then to decide to change the 2006 map regardless. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 12:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
2006 is a different case where a country didn't compete but was still allowed a vote because it was supposed to aq; which is a unique case that will never be replicated. It is also listed on eurovision.tv as last in the sf but as a withdrawn country at the same time, something that is not the case for any other withdrawals. Keeping it green (as a semi-final participant) but noting that it didn't compete (in the legend) seems like a good compromise — IмSтevantalk 12:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Serbia and Montenegro would never have competed in the semi-final in 2006 however, since they were automatically qualified after finishing in the top 10 in 2005. Their withdrawal meant that Croatia competed as an automatic finalist instead. The reason S&M are listed like this on the official website is purely for technical reasons, to allow the country to show up on the detailed voting section as a country. In my opinion this case should be treated like every other case of a late withdrawal; yes the legend can be altered to make reference to their ability to vote, however for consistency's sake I believe the same colour should be used across all the maps for when a country became a non-participant at a late stage. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Additionally, shading the country in the same way as we would do for semi-finalists adds a layer of confusion, given their original automatic qualification status, so a like-for-like comparison across all years would lead to questions I think. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 12:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Considering Serbia and Montenegro was the only country in 2006 to withdraw late, perhaps you're right and it can be the same color as other late withdrawals. I'll revert my edit — IмSтevantalk 12:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@Sims2aholic8: Since there is no consensus can you revert the 2021 map? — IмSтevantalk 22:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Done I'm also adding the "Allow overwriting" tag to any maps I originally uploaded so that other editors can upload improvements, as you are doing to some of the other maps. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Purple
Latest comment: 2 months ago24 comments4 people in discussion
Going off what @Grk1011: said in the previous discussion, is purple even necessary on maps leading up to the contest(s)? As they claimed, it takes away from info on who's competing in the semis and who's already in the final — IмSтevantalk 16:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Right, I think the map has a three phases:
When the contest is announced, it shows confirmed countries and those that have participated in the past (2 colors)
Following the draw it shows countries participating in the final, countries participating in the semi-finals, and countries that participated in the past but not that year (3 colors)
After the contest it shows finalist countries, countries eliminated in the semi-finals, and countries that participated in the past but not that year (3 colors)
Song selection status is somewhat interesting, but if a map of that nature is necessary, it should be in the participants section, not the Infobox. Grk1011 (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Wouldn't the first and the second phase be the same? We already know who the automatic finalists are, and the rest are all semi-finalists — IмSтevantalk 16:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I guess that's fine too, but I'm trying to align this with the article's sections at the time. We don't have a finalists section from the start, it's all just a participants table until countries are divided between the semis. This map needs to relate to something straightforward in the article body. Grk1011 (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I get that but countries aren't divided by semis on the map — IмSтevantalk 16:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes and those distinctions aren't in tabular form in the article at that point in time, hence why I suggest not separating semi and final until after the draw when the new section are made. Grk1011 (talk) 16:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I would argue that doesn't matter, but if it really does, the participation table (at first) can be divided by coloring the cells containing country names blue or green corresponding with the map
Provisional list of participants of the Eurovision Song Contest 2024
These colors would be removed following the addition of semi-final tables (the draw) — IмSтevantalk 16:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I would oppose this. I don't believe we should be adding temporary features like this which will have only a small value add, when it is already clearly explained in prose that the Big 5 and the host country qualify automatically and all other countries participate in one of the two semi-finals. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
And to be clear by this I mean the table shading. I would wholly support removing the purple classification on maps, again this is another temporary feature that I think we should be trying to move away from. I would concur with Grk1011's steps; we would continue to update the map as new countries are confirmed, without a distinction between finalists and semi-finalists, and once the participants list is published we then update the map with the finalists/semi-finalists split, and then this is updated again during Eurovision week as countries are eliminated. Another point to raise is with the purple shading it sometimes doesn't work out that it's a one-way system, because there are times where artists pull out and then countries which were blue/green have to go back to purple. Removing the purple shading entirely would make things a lot simpler and require a lot less work, and a lot fewer comments on here from readers complaining that the map hasn't been updated fast enough as well! Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
But why would you not make a distinction before the draw? If we're removing purple then we should just get rid of it and use green and blue from the get-go — IмSтevantalk 17:55, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
I suppose because it's such a provisional thing before the official list is released, and there are too many hypothetical situations that no one can predict. As an example, we all know that the Big 5 are going to be there every year, but we can't be 100% certain on that. Also you never know what rules changes might come up, or potentially if the host country has to change for some reason. Additionally if we were to shade them in blue and green from the get go, I think it would look weird if we're talking about Big 5 and host in the final but then there's only two or three countries shaded blue. If everything is in purple at the start then it's a more blanket statement that these countries have said that they will be there, which is a much more concrete position than trying to separate them as we go along. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
So to clarify again, the proposal I would be supporting is that every confirmed country would be in purple to start, and then all would switch to blue or green from the publication of the participants list depending on whether they're automatically qualified or compete in the semi-finals. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Wait you guys don't distinguish finalists and semi-finalists before the draw happens? Yoyo360 (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Currently there is no place in the article where they get distinguished prior to the draw; I think if purple was to be ditched, that should be done throughout the entire season, there is no reason to keep it until the draw — IмSтevantalk 17:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Isn't it a bit weird? Someone who doesn't knwo anything about the contest won't necessarily know that semi-finals will happen, wouldn't know about the big five and wouldn't know about automatic qualifiers. It only makes sense to make a distinction somehow. Yoyo360 (talk) 17:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
That is what prose is for. Tables should never be the primary means of conveying information, and should only be used for complex data that would be too unwieldy to convey through prose, e.g. the participants and results tables. Up until the semi-final allocation draw there is no need for additional tables beyond the participants table; we would have a large semi-finalists table and a much smaller finalists table, which I don't believe adds any extra value. We're very clear in the prose before the allocation draw that there are two semis, the semi-finalists will get split between them, Big 5 and host in final etc. but this doesn't need to be additionally spelt out in table format. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
And the prose is located way below the table, where people only interested in the countries probably won't go read. Something about participating countries should be attached to... well the list of participating countries. Yoyo360 (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
It's also clearly included in the lead don't forget, but yes before the allocation draw some prose might be useful in the participating countries section on this point. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe like this? And that would lend itself to removing purple from the map on the point that Yoyo stated, that a map should include content from the article's prose — IмSтevantalk 18:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Without mention of song selection status. That's not what the map is for. Grk1011 (talk) 19:55, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
That's what I said — IмSтevantalk 19:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Ok great then. Are you ok with removing mention of song selection status from the maps then (as well as purple?). I think it's basically just 2024. Grk1011 (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine with it — IмSтevantalk 14:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and removed the purple shading from the 2024, and have updated the infobox to create a new "PreList" predefined legend template that covers purple (for confirmed participants) and grey (for previous participants) before the publication of the list. You can see this in action at Draft:Eurovision Song Contest 2025. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 15:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
New map
Latest comment: 2 months ago6 comments3 people in discussion
A new base map has been made for Eurovision events that is much more detailed than the current one. Are there any other changes that you want to see to the map?
Thank you again for all your hard work on this! As I mentioned on your talk page there are some large lakes in Australia that could do with being added, which I'm sure you're working on already, but besides that I think it looks amazing! Please do reach out if you need some help with replicating the new map across our Eurovision events. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Australian lakes added, anything else? — IмSтevantalk 18:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I personally don't care for the addition of small lakes, and think they may clutter the map at a small size like in the infobox and in the articles generally. But a good update which is something we talked about last year. -- AxG/✉ 21:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Just noticed there's a small discrepancy on the Sweden-Norway border about halfway up around the same longitude as Trondheim, where it looks like there is a small sliver of land that belongs to Norway that juts into Sweden. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Have no idea what that was, fixed — IмSтevantalk 11:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Israeli-Arab conflicts on maps
Latest comment: 2 months ago6 comments2 people in discussion
Considering that we currently don't show Crimea as a part of Russia even if it's defacto under Russian control due to it not being internationally recognized, shouldn't the Israeli occupation of Sinai also be excluded from maps of Europe from 1968 till 1982 (currently our maps show it as a part of Israel from 1968 till 1973), as Sinai was not recognized as a part of Israel? Additionally, we don't have any labels for the occupied Golan Heights, which is in the same vein as the Sinai occupation — IмSтevantalk 13:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Edit: the same arguement goes for the Israeli occupation of Palestine on maps since 1968, and Jordanian/United Arabian Republic occupations of West Bank and Gaza respectively on maps from 1956 until 1967 — IмSтevantalk 18:41, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
I think you raised a good point here. There is no reason to display Sinai as part of Israel only for the maps prior to their participation in the contest. Either in all or in none, and I agree on none. The same reasoning should apply to the Golan Heights, given that they are still largely occupied but are not included in Israel in most other maps. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 18:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Reply to edit: Regarding the Palestinian territories before 1988, there wasn’t a State of Palestine so it might be misleading to display them separate from both Israel and Egypt/Jordan. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps a dotted line between Palestine and Israel from 1956 till 1988 (on the 1948 armstice line/1988 borders proper), or we can just ask somebody from WikiProject history to lend us a hand in figuring out what the international community was recognizing/thinking at the time — IмSтevantalk 10:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes, a dotted line between Palestine and the ruling country (Israel/Egypt/Jordan depending on the year) seems like a good solution. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 11:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Kosovo
Latest comment: 2 months ago5 comments2 people in discussion
My question is regarding Kosovo's inclusion on Eurovision maps. While it makes sense to have it included in the more recent maps, why is it included in the 2008 contest map? At the time, 40 countries had recognized Kosovo's independence, 57 by the 2009 contest, and 67 by the 2010 contest; where exactly is the line drawn? Additionally, if we're going by the arguement that it having sufficient recognition today warrants its inclusion since its founding, could the same arguement be made about including Kosovo on the 90s contests maps? — IмSтevantalk 18:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
I believe the original reason Kosovo was included on the map from 2008 is that this is after the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. The difference between the 2008 declaration and the 1991 declaration is the international recognition that came almost immediately following the second declaration. 40 countries in 2008 would still represent around 20% of all countries, so it's hardly a small number, and is markedly different from other situations of breakaway territories which have almost no international recognition after decades of de facto independence. On a related note, File:ESC 1991 Map 2.svg shows Estonia and Latvia in a similar position, as these countries declared independence in 1990 but did not achieve full independence or join the UN until after the 1991 contest. There could be a case for having Kosovo as a separate entity on all maps going back to the 1992 contest, given that Kosovo was never fully part of FR Yugoslavia institutions, or the 2000 contest, after UNMIK was created. We already list Kosovo as a non-participating broadcaster for a number of years post-UNMIK, so there would be a logic to also having Kosovo separate from FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro/Serbia. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:08, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
While updating the maps with the new geographical features and corrections, I have created a new version of the 2007 map which shows Kosovo as separate from Serbia but with the same shading as Serbia, to indicate that while Kosovo was not nominally independent or had not yet declared its independence, that under UNMIK it was run separately from the rest of Serbia. My thoughts would be that this separate dotted border for Kosovo but still connected to Serbia/Serbia and Montenegro/FR Yugoslavia in terms of shading would be used on maps from 2000 onwards (after the establishment of UNMIK). Any thoughts? Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I see the vision but the UN itself was recognizing it as Serbian territory, and Kosovo itself was not asserting a position of independence. If not a single country, including the country that would be formed on the territory in question, was claiming its independence, I don't see the purpose — IмSтevantalk 17:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah after I posted this I read more into it and the UN position was that Serbian territory was not in question with UNMIK, so I will retract this position and support all maps pre-Kosovan declaration of independence making no distinction between Kosovo and Serbia. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Comment: I should note that we should also be careful when picking colors and taking color blindness into account. Here are the 4 colors we're using now — IмSтevan talk 17:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Done I'm also adding the "Allow overwriting" tag to any maps I originally uploaded so that other editors can upload improvements, as you are doing to some of the other maps. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Serbia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
