Talk:Tsubasacon

The Angel-chans
Raven, the artist who drew the Angel-chans, was the one who gave the Angel-chans their individual names. However, the first use of the name Angel-chans was in one of my posts titled Naming the Angel-chans. After that post, the name stuck.--TheFarix 01:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh lordie, I just had to fix that spelling in the entry. It hurts my brain to see "Angel" mispelled as "Angle"... And this coming from a guy who helps run a convention whose retired mascot was effectively a Demon... :P Traegorn 17:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, Angle, from what I understand is an intentional misspelling.--み使い Mitsukai 17:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It really was a typo. Oh well, it's been fixed now &mdash; and on this page as well. It's just funny that I spelled it wrong here but had it spelled correctly in all of the reference links.--TheFarix 22:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

New sources
I've included three additional sources that could be used to further enhance the article. Two of which should also help with any challenges to Tsubasacon's notability per WP:CORP, though more is desired. --TheFarix (Talk) 17:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)










 * I added the two Herald-Dispatch articles that were written by Sebert and Rosenberger. Jlee bly (talk) 13:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Possible table addition
Just a thought, but could we perhaps add another column to the table? Eg.:

Jlee bly 12:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it would make some of the information a bit too constrained. --Farix (Talk) 12:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's true... just something I thought of, and decided to discuss it before going hog-wild on the Wiki.  Table is a nice touch, btw. Jlee bly 12:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I just figured that it was an easier way to add information while avoiding most WP:COI issues. --Farix (Talk) 14:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Dubious
All of the other convention attendance numbers cited to animecons.com exclude convention staff, whereas the 750 number includes staff. This should be made clear in the article. --Malkinann (talk) 05:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, they don't. I've dealt enough with AnimeCons numbers to know that sometimes cons include the staff and sometimes they don't, and the method changes form year to year. But what is being reported is the total attendance for the convention for that year. This is consistent with all of the anime convention articles up until I stopped maintaining them. It's not the easiest of tasks to keep the data up to date for over 100 articles. —Farix (t &#124; c) 11:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I feel it's not the best look to have some numbers with staff and some without in the same article without also noting that fact in the article. Attendance could conceivably be understood to be excluding staff by default, and so including staff in some of the data silently is misleading to the reader. --Malkinann (talk) 12:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, you can't state that those numbers include or don't include staff because not reliable sources stating whether staff was included or not. Only the 2008 convention has two numbers, and even that number doesn't state that staff was included in either number. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:05, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The other data sets are described as 'people', which when compared with 'paid attendees' and 'paid attendees vs total', implies that the 'people' numbers are likely to include staff and be the total amount of people at the con, rather than just paying attendees. Is there an alternate wording of the footnote that you would be more comfortable with?  --Malkinann (talk) 13:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The assumption that staff are included in the counts is just that, an assumption. And assumptions have no place on Wikipedia. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there an alternate wording of the footnote that you would be more comfortable with, or an alternative footnote? As it is, I believe that to report the conflated number without comment that it is conflated is not a neutral point of view. --Malkinann (talk) 13:17, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Simply report the numbers as reported, there is no need to footnote them. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Why should we exclude the extra information about the data? --Malkinann (talk) 13:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If AnimeCons.com says "paid attendees", then the number is paid attendance. If it just says "people" or "total" then it's the total number of warm bodies with a badge (staff, press, guests, etc.)  If it says "estimated" then that number is likely not an exact figure.  Trust me on this, I know how it works better than anyone! ;)  As for if it should specify here, I think the differences are too minute to worry about.  If it was 750 people or 723 paid attendees, that's not much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.  PatrickD (talk) 22:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Mascot Back Story
Is this pertinent information as far as the article is concerned? Jlee bly (talk) 16:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Have we ever officially published Mitsuki's backstory? Because I don't think we have, making the content unverifiable. —Farix (t &#124; c) 18:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)