Talk:Daisho Con

This article was nominated for deletion on April 3 2008. The result of the discussion was delete.

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sourcing issues[edit]

Breaking down the current issues with sourcing in this article:
anime-source.com - Would not meet notability, appears to be fansite. Not on list of WP:A&M/ORS
daishocon.com - Primary source, are there secondary sources to back up this information?
channelawesome.com - Guests of the convention, so conflict of interest issues. Also not a reliable source for convention news.
WAOW hotel closing article - Only concern here is the con is not specifically mentioned. Cons move hotels all the time, it's not really notable.
plattevillegaming.com - Seems to be a gaming association and not an news/reporting site, so notability cannot be established.

I would contend that most of the information from these sources should be removed, minus the WAOW article being borderline. Esw01407 (talk) 14:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing discussion on sourcing:

forums.animecons.com - Forums are not good sources, they can be edited, no editorial oversight.

ANN Press Release - I've reworked to use it, but it's not a great source due to it being outdated. A more recent source would be better.

Nerdandtie - It's hard to establish them as a source at this point, while there coverage is good, it really didn't match up to the points the sentence was trying to make. Esw01407 (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]