258:
much as I'd like to see this article kept clean until a detailed one is compiled/sourced....it likely won't happen due to the notoriety the convention has received amongst attendees. Please be patient while post-con excitement causes a few "quick and dirty" articles to be posted. (delete as necessary)
484:
also makes particular that: "Large organizations are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability; however, smaller organizations can be notable, just as individuals can be notable, and arbitrary standards should not be used to
406:
does not satisfy
Knowledge's inclusion criteria, then you are more then welcome to nominate it. But keep in mind that No Brand Con has already been to AFD once and was kept. And given that your only edits have been about the deletion of this convention's article, the nomination my be viewed as a bad
257:
Please keep in mind that
Knowledge is an open community where anyone can make or adjust an entry. This entry was not created by the convention staff, and that should be kept in mind when making assumptions as to its purpose. I see a lot of sloppy references posted as well as misinformation. As
668:
A couple things regarding those arguments. First, if the community decides what is "significant coverage" then it is well worth at least pointing out that there is no minimum in the guidelines. Second, it seems that you missed my argument that the duration of the convention and how long ago it
475:
states that "an organization is a group of more than one person formed together for a purpose. This includes commercial and non-commercial activities including interest groups. Please consider notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, etc." Daisho Con is student run
127:
Article is about an apparently non-notable convention. It does have a few references, but so far every one of them is to information published by the convention itself, or by people associated with it. There are also a few blogs that talk about the convention, but there is nothing that would
618:(which no one has taken an issue with) Furthermore, how long ago the con happened and the number of times it has happened are not areas of concern under Knowledge's notability requirement. Please stop bringing up the fact that it has only happened once.
479:
which has created the third largest convention of this type in
Wisconsin (as of right now) which gives the group a fairly large amount of notability and has had a notable/demonstrable effect on the anime/manga/sci-fi/etc. culture in that area.
381:
which only has references from animecons.com. Even on its talk page the only other mentioned references are from the campus newspaper, which were likely submitted/written by people dealing with the convention.
669:
happened are irrelevant to
Knowledge's notability standards. Let's stick to arguing the legitimacy of the article rather than trying to patronize me on what you deem to be appropriate action.
502:
It appears this convention has been held exactly once, and not even a month ago. Isn't there some inclusion criteria where it has to be a repeating event? Does a one-off get an article?
120:
226:
I was going to hold off from commenting since I had that spat with the article's original creator. (He took his anger out on me because I initially tagged the article for
181:
614:
that says there is a minimum number of acceptable sources. The con could run for 6 years and still have no 3rd party references, as is the case with
431:
There is no minimum to article quantity for inclusion criteria. You say that there is a minimum of two in practice, but it doesn't appear to be so.
503:
447:
357:
article, there are actually two independent sources listed on its talk page which haven't been incorporated into the article yet. --
342:
307:
17:
146:
338:
87:
82:
316:
number of coverage stories, only that they present "Significant coverage" (address the subject directly in detail, etc.)
306:. The same story is linked to by several other indipendent/reliable news sources as well i.e. Green Bay Press Gazette:
91:
184:
as Daisho Con. While I think the reasons in that AFD no longer apply (thus speedy G4 does not apply), I would say
74:
697:
36:
648:
is left to the community. To argue that the exact wording of a guideline somehow trumps consensus is considered
696:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
546:. However, it received a ton of coverage from various media outlets. But even so, see my comment above about
353:
In practice, we like to have at least two independent sources or one nationally published source. As for the
230:
speedy deletion.) However, the nominator and Kesac make good points. The article is also getting filled with
543:
507:
652:
and frowned upon. It is also inappropriate to respond to every "delete" comment with the same arguments. --
477:
300:
443:
299:
I would just like to point out that the 3rd party media coverage of Daisho Con, specifically found here:
547:
435:
399:
678:
663:
627:
598:
575:
561:
529:
511:
494:
451:
422:
390:
368:
325:
290:
266:
245:
216:
197:
175:
151:
78:
56:
279:
670:
619:
567:
521:
486:
382:
330:
317:
259:
659:
557:
418:
364:
241:
171:
140:
70:
62:
674:
623:
571:
525:
490:
439:
386:
334:
321:
263:
212:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
594:
539:
520:
No, there's not. Also, many events that have only happened once have wikipedia articles.
408:
193:
641:
611:
481:
472:
310:
303:
287:
654:
637:
552:
413:
400:
The existence of other articles with similar issues does not legitimize this article.
359:
236:
231:
227:
166:
136:
649:
615:
403:
378:
354:
283:
208:
129:
50:
589:
Perhaps, if they have one next year, there will be more sources but until then...
164:. I have restored the original article and redirected the copy to the original. --
108:
133:
590:
189:
161:
640:
developed by discussion. This is especially true for guidelines, such as
542:, which may be a candidate for deletion too. The only other case was the
282:
is not a blog or self-published, and the source would appear to meet the
471:
stance, I think Daisho Con has notability as an organization as well.
286:
criteria. However, it was the only such source I was able to locate.
690:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
234:
and appear to be used by the con as an information platform. --
207:
non-notable (refs amount to nothing more than self refs)
115:
104:
100:
96:
160:
Original creator attempted a copy&paste move to
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
700:). No further edits should be made to this page.
485:create a bias favoring larger organizations."
188:unless more than one reliable source is found.
8:
636:First, Knowledge's decisions are based on a
566:I'm not referring to only anime conventions.
409:disrupting Knowledge to illustrate a point
467:In another effort to give reasons for my
377:I didn't bring up Nan Desu Kan. I cited
7:
24:
180:Note: Was previously deleted via
302:does indeed satisfy Knowledge's
610:Again, there is nothing in the
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
57:01:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
679:07:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
664:21:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
644:where the interpretation of
628:20:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
599:17:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
576:07:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
562:21:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
530:20:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
512:14:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
495:07:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
452:02:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
423:21:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
391:20:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
369:12:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
326:07:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
291:04:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
267:06:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
246:03:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
217:03:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
198:03:07, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
176:02:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
152:02:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
130:independent reliable source
717:
693:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
544:New York Anime Festival
314:does not have a minimum
343:few or no other edits
134:notability guidelines
646:significant coverage
407:faith nomination or
402:If you believe that
345:outside this topic.
280:Wausau Daily Herald
132:as required by the
612:inclusion criteria
311:inclusion criteria
304:inclusion criteria
44:The result was
455:
438:comment added by
346:
232:original research
149:
143:
708:
695:
454:
432:
328:
147:
141:
118:
112:
94:
53:
34:
716:
715:
711:
710:
709:
707:
706:
705:
704:
698:deletion review
691:
638:rough consensus
540:Anime Milwaukee
433:
114:
85:
69:
66:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
714:
712:
703:
702:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
666:
631:
630:
602:
601:
583:
582:
581:
580:
579:
578:
564:
533:
532:
515:
514:
497:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
428:
427:
426:
425:
394:
393:
372:
371:
348:
347:
294:
272:
271:
270:
269:
249:
248:
220:
219:
201:
200:
178:
128:qualify as an
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
713:
701:
699:
694:
688:
687:
680:
676:
672:
667:
665:
661:
657:
656:
651:
650:Wikilawyering
647:
643:
639:
635:
634:
633:
632:
629:
625:
621:
617:
613:
609:
606:
605:
604:
603:
600:
596:
592:
588:
585:
584:
577:
573:
569:
565:
563:
559:
555:
554:
549:
548:WP:OTHERSTUFF
545:
541:
537:
536:
535:
534:
531:
527:
523:
519:
518:
517:
516:
513:
509:
505:
504:76.116.247.15
501:
498:
496:
492:
488:
483:
478:
474:
470:
466:
463:
462:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
430:
429:
424:
420:
416:
415:
410:
405:
401:
398:
397:
396:
395:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
375:
374:
373:
370:
366:
362:
361:
356:
352:
351:
350:
349:
344:
340:
336:
332:
327:
323:
319:
315:
312:
308:
305:
301:
298:
295:
292:
289:
285:
281:
277:
274:
273:
268:
265:
261:
256:
253:
252:
251:
250:
247:
243:
239:
238:
233:
229:
225:
222:
221:
218:
214:
210:
206:
203:
202:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
177:
173:
169:
168:
163:
159:
156:
155:
154:
153:
150:
144:
138:
135:
131:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
692:
689:
653:
645:
616:No Brand Con
607:
586:
551:
499:
476:organization
468:
464:
440:Capitocapito
412:
404:No Brand Con
379:No Brand Con
358:
355:Nan Desu Kan
313:
309:Knowledge's
296:
275:
254:
235:
223:
204:
185:
165:
157:
126:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
434:—Preceding
341:) has made
224:Weak Delete
186:weak delete
162:Daisho Con
469:Weak Keep
297:Weak Keep
288:Lankiveil
276:Weak Keep
71:DaishoCon
63:DaishoCon
448:contribs
436:unsigned
339:contribs
148:contribs
137:Jayron32
121:View log
671:VicFlik
642:WP:NOTE
620:VicFlik
608:Comment
568:VicFlik
522:VicFlik
500:Comment
487:VicFlik
482:WP:CORP
473:WP:CORP
465:Backing
383:VicFlik
331:VicFlik
318:VicFlik
260:VicFlik
209:ukexpat
88:protect
83:history
52:MBisanz
587:Delete
278:, the
205:Delete
116:delete
92:delete
46:delete
655:Farix
591:L0b0t
553:Farix
538:Only
414:Farix
360:Farix
284:WP:RS
237:Farix
190:Kesac
167:Farix
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
675:talk
660:Talk
624:talk
595:talk
572:talk
558:Talk
550:. --
526:talk
508:talk
491:talk
444:talk
419:Talk
411:. --
387:talk
365:Talk
335:talk
322:talk
264:talk
255:Note
242:Talk
213:talk
194:talk
172:Talk
158:Note
142:talk
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
182:AFD
677:)
662:)
626:)
597:)
574:)
560:)
528:)
510:)
493:)
450:)
446:•
421:)
389:)
367:)
337:•
329:—
324:)
244:)
228:A7
215:)
196:)
174:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
48:.
673:(
658:(
622:(
593:(
570:(
556:(
524:(
506:(
489:(
442:(
417:(
385:(
363:(
333:(
320:(
293:.
262:(
240:(
211:(
192:(
170:(
145:.
139:.
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.