Talk:Otakon

message: We may want to cut back the 2005 section to keep it roughly consistent in length with the rest of the article.--Aresef 21:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cut back 2005 section

message: I believe the 2006 Artist Alley controversy bit should be cut, along with the bit about Aramark, or at least worked into the rest of the 2006 section where it fits.  In the grand scheme of things, they are rather minor issues that preceded the convention.  That, and many of the worries within are moot points now.  Feel free to revert if you'd like.  I'm just trying to reduce the unnecessary clutter on the page.--Aresef 02:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cut 2006 Artist Alley Controversy

message: Would somebody explain the reasons behind the References and Original Research tags? Otherwise, I will end up deleting them Roninbk 17:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the entire article contain a single reference (see reference section). Articles writen witout citing verifiable references is generally considred original research. --TheFarix (Talk) 21:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In its defense it had more links, but not in inline references. I went through and pulled out a few more references, and added some links to AnimeCons.com. --Roninbk t c e  # 23:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References & original research

message: I've tagged this section as needing some cleanup. It is starting to become too unwieldy with the year by year subsections, which encourages a lot of unnecessary cruft. Identifying particular phases—Early years, History at the BCC, etc—would be a much better approach. --TheFarix (Talk) 21:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went through the entire article with a comb, rephrasing what was already there, killing as many weasels as I could, and standardizing each year's entry. The article is well under the 32KB barrier now. 2005 is still a huge entry, but I don't know what else to cut. --Roninbk t c e  # 23:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I appreciate the compliments. I culled the lists of guests from AnimeCons.com, you should probably contact them to clarify said status. --Roninbk t c e  # 06:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History cleanup

message: While the interview with Jim Vowles (external reference 16) is hosted at www.frontrowcrew.com/forum, the interview itself was conducted by GeekNights, the owners of the domain and administrators of that forum, for their talk show. 216.255.101.58 20:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor Fixes

message: I've marked a number of statements that are uncited and really needs citations. I'm sure that there are some citations that will cover multiple statements in the same paragraph. In those cases, just but the citations at the end of the last relevant statement. Attempts should be made to find as many credible, third-party publications to use as sources because I would very much like to see this article put under peer review and eventually become a GAC. I will also say that much of the article still ready like an advert or a promotional piece. Such promotional languages should be removed. --TheFarix (Talk) 03:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a Doom mod web site somewhere that has it for download?  That could be a source, I guess. --PatrickD 17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about http://www.otakon.com/memoirs_1996.asp?  It's Otakon's own site which mentions the DOOM mod.  Or AnimeCons.com (http://www.animecons.com/events/info.shtml/342) or DOOM Wad Station (http://www.doomwadstation.com/main/otakon.html -- you can actually download the mod here)?  (I have no idea what constitutes a proper site to cite on WikiPedia. 68.163.82.148 12:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Still needing more sources

message: * 
* 
* http://www.taxexemptworld.com/organization.asp?tn=264807 - listing for Otakorp, Inc. (though it is slightly out of date and the record is being updated)
* 
* "Otakon 2009 coverage." Anime Diet - several reports on Otakon 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moritheil (talk • contribs) 09:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential references 

message: :Image:O 2006 logo sm.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:O 2006 logo sm.jpg

message: Where is the Otakon 2007 section for this article??? KSweeley 16:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone??? KSweeley 10:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any third party sources currently available to right a section from? --Farix (Talk) 21:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I discovered the problem. When someone added a reference to the 2006 section, they left off a closing </ref> tag. It's fixed now. --Farix (Talk) 12:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Otakon '07 was important, one subject was the appearing of Linetrap, one of the most known memes in the actual web. Xopauxo wiki (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

text: What the heck is Xopauxo talking about?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.48.240 (talk) 05:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Otakon 2007 section missing?

message: God knows how many times this has been brought up, but I can only guess that I'm not the first, nor will be the last. Nonetheless, I'm still a bit unsure on how I feel about Otacon redirecting here. Considering the fact that the (code)name of the character uses an alternate spelling of Otakon that is intentionally reserved for that character, and the implication that most fans recognise this difference, I don't really agree with it; yet there must be a liable reason. I won't agree with arguments of "outsider's ignorance" or what have you. If that were the case, the MGS characters page would refer back here, instead of in this direction. How was this issue dealt with before, or has it even been an issue in the past?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.84.89.90 (talk) 03:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Otakon/Otacon

message: As an Otakon staffer and an enthusiastic Wikipedian (as well as for WP:WikiProjects), I strongly recommend that this article do what it can to reach B-class.  That would mean more REAL information, with citations included, and less speculation, which takes up far too much room and should probably be deleted.  As noted above, this article fails on referencing and citation as well as coverage and accuracy.  Much, much more could be said about the actual programming, and the question must be addressed in the article: what makes Otakon different from other anime conventions?  So, pretty much all of future expansion could be deleted, we need a lot more outside sourcing, and some information on past events, especially 2010, would be great as well.  We can do it everyone!  Adavis444 (talk) 11:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ugrade article standards

message: I did not want to delete all of the material in the "Future Expansion" so I first moved the idea of a four-day convention to history, referring to 2005, and I made sure to include the 1st Mariner Arena in the "Facilities Section". As for the rest, I left it as a  with some comments of my own, which are as follows:
: This all seems to be mere speculation of something that hasn't been brought up in Otakorp discussions to which I have been party too (staff member, attended meetings in 2010). I'll leave the whole section as a comment for now, but it should perhaps be deleted in the future at the discretion of other editors. Please keep in mind the Wikipedia:Five pillars (I am a WikiKnight you know), most notably the first, that Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as according to the second point and the tenth point, WIKIPEDIA IS NOT FOR UNVERIFIABLE MATERIAL and WIKIPEDIA IS NOT FOR UNVERIFIABLE MATERIAL.
So, I will leave the section as is until someone either makes the section more appropriate for an encyclopedia or deletes it altogether. Please leave comments.
Adavis444 (talk) 05:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Expansion section unfit for Wikipedia 

message: I added that Otakon will be moving to Washington D.C. to the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in 2017 until at least 2021 in the info box and it was reverted and just want to know the reasoning behind waiting until the convention actually moves. It's confirmed and a done deal between Otakon/Otakorp and Washington D.C. so why can't it be listed in the info box? KSweeley (talk) 21:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Info Box revert

message: Who changed my edit for Otakon 2013 under "Event History" from "Otakon's 20th Anniversary" to "Otakon's 20th Year"? I'm on staff for Otakon and I received in 2013, a staff shirt that says on the reverse side "Otakon Staff 20th Anniversary." I can take a picture of my Otakon 2013 staff shirt as evidence. KSweeley (talk) 04:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: IP editor did with this note "As repeatedly pointed out on official channels, this was our 20th YEAR, our 20th CONVENTION -- the 20th anniversary will be the folllowing year." Esw01407 (talk) 11:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  This seems a bit off, if Otakon celebrated 2013 as their 20th anv then why the reword? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's like your birthday. Your first birthday you are technically zero years old. When you are one year old, it's your second birthday. When you are two it's your third birthday and so on. In this case, the first Anniversary would be the second Otakon. Second Anniversary is the third Otakon and soforth. Go all the way up and the 19th Anniversary is the 20th Otakon. Zero Serenity (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Otakon 2013 - 20th Anniversary

message: Could someone fix the "OfficialOtakonAttendance" citation? I somehow broke it by adding it to my most recent edits in the "Event History" table. Here's the link to the cited information: http://www.otakon.com/history_stats.asp  Thanks!!! KSweeley (talk) 07:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I fixed what was wrong. KSweeley (talk) 07:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference fix

message: I'm in Con feedback and the president of Otakorp broke news about legal action against Studio Nasu. This is a note to fix the section. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 19:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: CHB

message: This section is becoming very large and I feel it could benefit from a split here either that or trim down (Do we really need details like "Lowest Discounted Membership Fee"?). I have tagged the section as the entire section is from the official source which can be seen as promotional. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support the removal of the Growth, Lowest Discounted Membership Fee, Full Membership Fee, Staff Attendance, Dealers Attendance, and Artist Attendance as I'm not sure it's useful information. Attendance (Estimated Turnstile) might also not be necessary as most other anime conventions report either warm bodies or paid attendance. The amount of Primary Source content directly from Otakon's site is also concerning. Esw01407 (talk) 02:47, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I like how Anime Boston is for example it is short but explains enough so that it is not promotional. I will go ahead and shorten the table here soon if nobody objects to it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:09, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Event history

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Otakon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080814233607/http://www.publishersweekly.com:80/article/CA6586351.html? to http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/ca6586351.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi,
I've noticed the article for Otakon has been significantly rewritten.
The 2017 venue of the Marriott Marquis Washington D.C. hotel got removed but it was used for Otakon 2017 in addition to the Walter E. Washington Convention Center: https://www.otakon.com/info/location/
KSweeley (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massive rewrite of article, venue issue.