This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As much as I enjoy anime, it may be overstating the case to call an anime convention "Arizona culture". However, as the equivalent conventions in other cities are labeled as such, the category should probably stand. Even if I don't like it. Cheers! -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 22:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't do much editing or modification here on Wikipedia so I'm not 100% comfortable with the policies on deletion here. the following paragraph seems to violate many of wikipedia's standards of quality. Here is the suspect entry
"The third year may prove to be just as boring and lacking in competent organizers as the first two years. Stay tuned for a lack of printed schedules. Stay tuned for printed schedules that are inaccurate. Stay tuned for not being tuned in to the activites because they are out of schedules or they forgot to put half the stuff on them."
I don't know if the page should be reverted, or the section should be deleted. Maybe the writer would like to reword this? 4.190.165.100 00:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
This was clearly vandalism. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 05:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Due to the paucity of publications regarding anime conventions, where, precisely, is one to find references to them? -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 14:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all, with respect to Patrick's concerns, the article as I just edited now contained backup sources. However, there are three instances where is doesn't and I don't think absolutely needs it:
1. There is an attendance cap. 2. The guests confirmed by Anizona in 2007. 3. The sponsors confirmed by the convention
Frankly, I don't think any of those need additional confirmation. Especially seeing as all outside sources would use AniZona's info as their own source. There are more than enough citations now to corroborate what is written.
The only two OR problems now is the comment about being the first in AZ (which could be confirmed via anime-cons.com if there is a per-state search function), and sentence about California affecting attendance (which I want to give Miwasatoshi the courtesy of addressing). Kensuke Aida 11:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
More stuff from the 2005 convention (press releases, etc), feel free to insert as necessary.
http://se.cosplay.com/index.php/article/anizona-announces-yoshitaka-amano-as-a-guest-of-honor http://www.azcentral.com/community/chandler/articles/0321anime21Z6.html Arizona Republic "Anime Fans to Gather" March 31, 2005
I think this is pretty good proof of the "first convention" status here without any further OR issues. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 19:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
It just occurred to me.
I'm not saying put up something for the sake of putting up something, but certainly there is some relevant imagery for this article.
Kensuke Aida 15:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
To get out of the start class, we need to cover everything. Please provide an EVENTS section if possible. See AnimeIowa for a good example. Kopf1988 16:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Technically, Patrick is right. AniZona 3 had MASSIVE problems, but it would be extremely difficult to write about them under NPOV with adequate citation at this point. If anybody wants to read about the hoopla, go here:
http://www.anizona.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=38&sid=f398487813596e1749fd89e8c0437b08
I would recommend against using these as citations because I have my doubts about the reliability of this board's archives (as opposed to say the newsgroups or ACML). People have already started mirror some of the more sensitive stuff for these reasons.
Also, Patrick, e-mail me if you want details (john.hokanson@cox.net).
Kensuke Aida 08:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As much as I enjoy anime, it may be overstating the case to call an anime convention "Arizona culture". However, as the equivalent conventions in other cities are labeled as such, the category should probably stand. Even if I don't like it. Cheers! -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 22:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't do much editing or modification here on Wikipedia so I'm not 100% comfortable with the policies on deletion here. the following paragraph seems to violate many of wikipedia's standards of quality. Here is the suspect entry
"The third year may prove to be just as boring and lacking in competent organizers as the first two years. Stay tuned for a lack of printed schedules. Stay tuned for printed schedules that are inaccurate. Stay tuned for not being tuned in to the activites because they are out of schedules or they forgot to put half the stuff on them."
I don't know if the page should be reverted, or the section should be deleted. Maybe the writer would like to reword this? 4.190.165.100 00:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
This was clearly vandalism. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 05:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Due to the paucity of publications regarding anime conventions, where, precisely, is one to find references to them? -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 14:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
First of all, with respect to Patrick's concerns, the article as I just edited now contained backup sources. However, there are three instances where is doesn't and I don't think absolutely needs it:
1. There is an attendance cap. 2. The guests confirmed by Anizona in 2007. 3. The sponsors confirmed by the convention
Frankly, I don't think any of those need additional confirmation. Especially seeing as all outside sources would use AniZona's info as their own source. There are more than enough citations now to corroborate what is written.
The only two OR problems now is the comment about being the first in AZ (which could be confirmed via anime-cons.com if there is a per-state search function), and sentence about California affecting attendance (which I want to give Miwasatoshi the courtesy of addressing). Kensuke Aida 11:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
More stuff from the 2005 convention (press releases, etc), feel free to insert as necessary.
http://se.cosplay.com/index.php/article/anizona-announces-yoshitaka-amano-as-a-guest-of-honor http://www.azcentral.com/community/chandler/articles/0321anime21Z6.html Arizona Republic "Anime Fans to Gather" March 31, 2005
I think this is pretty good proof of the "first convention" status here without any further OR issues. -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 19:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
It just occurred to me.
I'm not saying put up something for the sake of putting up something, but certainly there is some relevant imagery for this article.
Kensuke Aida 15:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
To get out of the start class, we need to cover everything. Please provide an EVENTS section if possible. See AnimeIowa for a good example. Kopf1988 16:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Technically, Patrick is right. AniZona 3 had MASSIVE problems, but it would be extremely difficult to write about them under NPOV with adequate citation at this point. If anybody wants to read about the hoopla, go here:
http://www.anizona.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=38&sid=f398487813596e1749fd89e8c0437b08
I would recommend against using these as citations because I have my doubts about the reliability of this board's archives (as opposed to say the newsgroups or ACML). People have already started mirror some of the more sensitive stuff for these reasons.
Also, Patrick, e-mail me if you want details (john.hokanson@cox.net).
Kensuke Aida 08:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)