`  I've never disputed that you've raised points, as I too have raised counter-points in this debate.  I appreciate that you felt the need to clarify your perspective to others, but it is not my point of view that is dismissive of your suggestions, it is the 5 pillars of Wikipedia policy that dismiss your rationale - and I provided evidence for those policies to validate my point of view, which for the record is not my point of view, but the point of view of Wikipedia; because the guidance policies state so.  If we were to cease using sources from your so-called ``fansites`` then this very article would no longer exist.  One only needs to look at all the references to see that 99.9% of them are from those ``fansites`` as you call them.  Every article relies on sources from specialist websites that deal with the specialist topic, to which Eurovision is a specialised topic.  The reports are not ``speculation`` but are specialised journalistic reports on countries that are potential returns, withdrawals, and debuts.  As these are news reports regarding the 2014 contest, then we would not be providing a neutrally and unbiased written article if we were to decide to not mention them purely because we ``dislike`` the content.  No facts are being twisted, all facts have been covered neutrally within their respective proses.  If one of the proses doesn't look grammatically correct, then re-word it accordingly so that it does address the news reports more factually (and by that I mean in regards to Kosovo and Liechtenstein; as we have already established that Kazakhstan should be removed).  The ``drop the stick`` comment was aimed at everyone, including you and I.  At times your behaviour is rather pedantic, and that has been demonstrated above.  You start off with a debate and then say ``if others wish the content to remain, then you are OK with that``.  That implies that you'd drop the debate, not continue to engage and heat it up even more by disregarding policies that are fundamental to Wikipedia.  Although perhaps it is because I am the editor who is participating in this debate and has providing compelling evidence in terms of Wiki-rules that urges you to be combative?  That is how it looks to me right now, and if that wasn't your intention then I revoke my feelings.   ☮  `