Talk:Penguicon

message: I just started the page. I plan on cleaning this up with history, about and see also sections.
And how is this not neutral? Granted it is an upbeat pro-convention writeup, but I was unaware of any impending anti-convention factions with their negative anti-con messages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zifferent (talk • contribs) .}
:Try to avoid Weasel words and making it sound like an essay or a promo. Look at this paragraph: "think of a weekend long Linux User Group meeting with hundreds of other geeks which also just happens to have nationally acclaimed guests, its own wireless network, free caffeine and snacks always available, hotel room parties, lots of folks talking about Science Fiction and Fantasy, situated next to a place to buy really cool t-shirts and buttons and such, and with some extra events like amateur singing, anime, and a costume contest" . . . the tone is off for an encyclopedia article. You need to word it more like you would as if you were reading any encyclopedia, not covering the event for a newspaper. At Wikipedia, we are supposed to remain neutral and not pro- or anti- convention about anything, just stating the facts. If you don't do this it could end up deleted soon. So far though, all it requires is some cleanup, expansion and adjusting the tone. Looks like a good start to me. (Look up Linux User Groups as see how that article was written -- might give you some ideas as to what people here are looking for.) (Arundhati Bakshi (talk • contribs)) 12:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

message: A random question, does the Con's location change from year to year, or is it static?  Either way, you might want to mention that in the opening paragraph, along with the other vital bits of info, such as the con's subject matter, how long it's been in existence, etc.--Raguleader 02:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Con location? 

message: I've been hanging around #penguicon on Freenode for over a year now, and can say first-hand that it is effectively dead. except for two others who showed up for a day or two each, I was the only person ever in there. I think it's misleading to have it even listed on this page, as it's clearly not used. Thoughts? Unforgiven24 (talk) 19:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I just went ahead and did it. If anyone's strongly opposed, please just mention it here. Unforgiven24 (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  IRC Channel 

message: In order to establish notability, make reasonable external references, and eliminate using wikipedia as a primary information source (with the lists of Guests of Honor, etc), I've rewritten much of the page so that it sources the Huffington Post, various author blogs, and historical Penguicon local wiki pages.
This page still needs an awful lot of work, and there are still a number of notable historical elements not mentioned here (such as Penguicon's LN2 in the pool video and its appearance on Outrageous Acts of Science), but it's a start. 
Atdt1991 (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Penguicon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110819191803/http://landley.livejournal.com/41393.html to http://landley.livejournal.com/41393.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121122055645/http://www.citypages.com/2008-08-13/news/being-tron-guy/ to http://www.citypages.com/2008-08-13/news/being-tron-guy/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:17, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've done some work improving this article and improving its references, but I have a conflict of interest (see above). I'd appreciate someone else taking a look and deciding whether I've improved the references enough to warrant removal  of  and  templates. --Alison (Crazytales) (talk; edits) 17:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of primary sources and reliable sources templates