Talk:AnimeIowa

Discussion of Changes

I am aware that because of the open nature of Wikipedia that all my changes are subject to public review, so I wanted to set the record straight now, and make sure that this process is open to review.

My name is Cverlo and I am a member of the AnimeIowa convention staff. It is my intention to revise this wiki page to bring it inline with the standards of the wikipedia community, so that it is comparable to the wiki pages of our peer conventions.

Anyone who objects to this is welcome to voice their objections to the convention staff personally via the AnimeIowa forums. My screen name is Celebrimbor. You may send me a personal message, open a thread, or contact one of the convention executives if you feel I am overstepping my bounds.

Cverlo 17:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Farix: What convention page do you recommend we model the AnimeIowa convention page after? Cverlo 17:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Maintain the Events Section

First, I would like to point out I am currently in no way affiliated with AnimeIowa staff.

Secondly, Wikipedia IS an encyclopedia for useful information about notable subjects. AnimeIowa is the biggest Anime Convention in the state, with nearly 2,000 visitors. Because of this, I will soon be finding secondary sources for this article.

Thirdly, the events section. Having a list of events is valuable information for any person researching this Convention. It is not advertising, but a listing of the possible venues a person can visit while at Anime Iowa. It is also the clearest, and easiest way to sum-up how fun a convention might be. Other cons, [Youmacon], contain similar, but less detailed information. It is useful, notable information for the inclusion in Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kopf1988 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

First of all, I'm not disputing the notability of the convention. If I did that, I would have put a notability tag on it back in December. I do, however, view the "Events" section has the wrong tone as it is written in a form that attempts to "sell" the convention. But Events sections generally don't add anything relevant to convention articles except to pad it out. --Farix (Talk) 03:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I was arguing for the notability of the events section, however, and that source is the reasoning that the Events section is appropriate. If you read the entire link's article, you'll find some good reasons that the event section is important. A small Iowa convention would be expected to have few events and little excitement, however AnimeIowa is different, which is something important to note. The information about the events gives a much more detailed overview of the subject of the article. I would personally argue that all Convention pages have them, that way users can use Wikipedia to compare these event, and find out more information about each one. Would you feel it to be less of advertising if all the convention pages had the same information? If so, I could add that. Kopf1988 17:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Most cons will have the same events, so there is little point in including them into every convention's article. And again, a events section is mostly there to "sell" the convention. The very fact that you said, "A small Iowa convention would be expected to have few events and little excitement," indicates that the only reason the section is there is in order to "sell" the convention to other readers. If you want to tell people what events are going to be at the con, then that is better handle by the convention's website.

As a template, I would advice that you take a look at Anime Boston and Tsubasacon as examples of how a convention article should be organized. The Anime Boston article makes no mention of events outside of its infobox and the Tsubasacon article briefly mentions some of its events in its lead. But in both cases, the articles focuses on the histories of both conventions. --Farix (Talk) 22:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

If you look a little closer, however, you will also notice a list of events in the lead for Anime Boston. Although I understand that a list of events is a good way to sell a convention, it is also of good merit for inclusion on Wikipedia because of a wide variety of reasons. The events list consists of encyclopedic-level, verifiable (and verified) facts, that would be of interest to more than just a select few. These are usually the most important factors on whether or not something should be included in Wikipedia. I know it's a horrible comparison, but if you use your argument, having information about McDonalds having drive-throughs would be mostly there to "sell" McDonald's. Also, take a look at Anime_Detour to show that the AnimeIowa article is not the only one to list the events.

For the Anime Boston article, would the lists of guests of honor be used in the same way to "sell" the convention? Your argument could be applied to nearly anything. There is no reason that the events should be excluded from this article. Remember that Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, and there is no limit to the amount of relevant, encyclopedic, and factual information that can be included. Kopf1988 23:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The main difference I see is that those other articles don't just have a bulleted list of events. It seems to me like there's a big difference between a bulleted list of events and a paragraph written about what various events take place at the convention. --PatrickD 00:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

You missed the link I provided to Anime Detour. Kopf1988 01:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

He ignored it because Anime Detour is nowhere near the standard of an "ideal article" and absolutely should never be used as a template to write other convention articles. --Farix (Talk) 01:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I was simply stating that another article did have a bulleted list of events. (also AVCon Again, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia so don't try to limit it! A bulleted listing of events is the clearest, most concise way of presenting the information that is relevant to more than simply a select group of people. Kopf1988 04:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sources Added

Two secondary sources of information have been added, one verifying notability of the con, to prove what is put here is more than an advertisement, and the second verifying the events at the convention. Kopf1988 02:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Now, make that, more sources have been added! A lot of information from the same site, although a reliable source of information (you can see the author's done his work several times, and knows his stuff). Kopf1988 06:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

A few other sources for you to take advantage of:

• http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=B9F64110-AFC7-4277-B333B87C506B2062
• http://www.protoculture.ca/PA/PA60TOC.htm
• http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?cPath=1_322&products_id=15153&
• http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?cPath=1_322&products_id=15140&

...and I'm sure Anime Iowa was in other printed issues of Protoculture Addicts too. (Just trying to help remove any doubt of notability.) --PatrickD 04:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Remember Wiki is not paper

When considering deleting the History section, remember the information included might be valuable information to someone. It is clear, concise, and factual, and if someone doesn't care about it, they can simply skip past that section. Read the article Wiki is not paper in case you might disagree. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kopf1988 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

It has nothing to do with whether Wikipedia is paper or not and everything to do if the bulleted events list makes the article appear like an advertisement for the con, especially in the absents of other content. And if WP:NOT#PAPER is the best argument that you can make in keeping the bulleted list, then it's a very poor argument. --Farix (Talk) 12:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Please note that this section is regarding the History section, which someone might claim is unimportant as it stands and delete information. As for the events section: refer to the layout section of the Wiki is not paper meta essay. "Wikipedians should use lists to present list data." The events section has been formatted in the easiest to read format to present the information; writing it in prose is definitely not going to present the information more efficiently. Although an article can not contain advertising, it can "report objectively about such things so long as an attempt is made to approach neutral point of view."1 Additionally, "articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style."2

In no way does the events section solely represent advertising for AnimeIowa. It is unbiased, objective, clear, and concise. It begins with a factual statement about the convention, as it does have events and does require a badge. Then furthers with a statement from a credible source (he has been a guest at several other Anime Conventions, so he is notable in this area). It concludes with an easy to follow list of events... the purpose of the events section. My not paper argument was for an entirely different part of the article. Kopf1988 02:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

New Section Ideas

How about some ideas for new sections possibly? Kopf1988 19:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Under Construction

Please see This Page for a suggested change, and discuss here or there. Kopf1988 20:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Recent Changes

The recent changes have come from a page I have been working on to replace the old page here with a new layout and new style... much more encyclopedic. Kopf1988 02:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)