Talk:Dragon Con/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Expansion

I just added a few lines to the body of the article, but I think someone needs to do a little more than that. -- Ringwraith10

Sections

I think the article needs to be divided into discrete sections, instead of just having that enormous block of text. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Other

I thought Wizard World Chicago was the second largest. --69.214.216.35 04:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

2007

I thought the Hyatt was being very unfair about shutting down access to stairways and rerouting pedestrian traffic. I'm glad I was not the only one that noticed this. --Mjrmtg 13:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

With the continued increase in attendance and traffic, it was the only sane thing to do. I mean, so you couldn't go back up the stairs from the Hilton. Big deal. You turn slightly right, enter into the lower quarter, and come back up inside. That's actually a far better deal. --Randal L. Schwartz 06:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

No that part wasn't a big deal, but like the article says "Many convention attendees were denied entrance to the Hyatt during the evening hours, despite having a valid convention badge. Security demanded that convention attendees show a room key to gain entry to the hotel even though there were still convention panels, concerts, and other events going on inside the Hyatt." ~ This is a big deal. --Mjrmtg 11:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

People can add all the fact-tags they want, it doesn't change the fact that the Hyatt messed up in 2007. --Mjrmtg 02:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:V, "Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references." I'm providing editors a chance to verify the paragraphs about the issues in 2007. If no sources are provided, I'll (eventually) remove those paragraphs. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 04:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

My primary concern is that it takes up a disproportionate percent of the history section. This can be fixed by summarizing the 2007 paragraph, or (preferably) expanding the history section. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 15:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The entire 2007 section reads like a rant from a really pissed off person, and is full of opinion.--Naddahnaut 02:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

It has been removed. Plenty of time was given for other editors to find sources; none appeared, so it's gone. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 19:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Yea they screwed up a year in advance reservation. My friends got there the day of convention with their reservation and the Hyatt said "oh sorry, no room. It was given away." They pitched a fit so much that we got a suite instead. It was "sweet". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.15.38 (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Attendance

Does anyone know where I can find an independent source citing this year's attendance at 61,000 people? I know that there were that many people, but I cannot currently find something for citation. MistahBlu 14:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It's very unlikely you'll ever see an "official" attendance figure of greater than "20,000+", because that's the "gentleman's agreement" between D*C officials and the city about how many attend. In truth, it's been far more, but never "officially" more than 20,000. It's a game. --Randal L. Schwartz 17:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I removed the "second largest" claim, since Comic-Con International (125,000), Fan Expo Canada (50,000+), New York Comic-Con (49,000), and even Anime Expo (44,000) list higher attendee counts. In CCI, NYCC, and AX's cases, those numbers are for individual attendees, not for the higher "bodies-per-day" method. 1-54-24 19:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd actually like to see citation for that "gentleman's agreement," which is also mentioned in the article. I understand that proving such a thing is a near impossibility, but I always hear rumor of the artificial number shrinking without ever hearing anybody confess to it. Next to impossible to prove, but still just rumor as far as I know. Wuzzled (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

2008 Guests

Telling, isn't it, that the only guests listed were female porn stars . . .

Edited to add a few more prominent names.

Phillip (talk) 00:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I wish, though, they would get rid of Cruxshadows. Ugh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.15.38 (talk) 16:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

A standard for "the late"

In the paragraph below, "the late" is added to four guests, yet not "the late" H. P. Lovcraft. Is there a standard how long a person must be deceased before they are no longer "late"?

The inaugural Dragon*Con featured Guest of Honor Michael Moorcock, Lynn Abbey and the late Robert Asprin, the late Robert Adams, Ultima creator Richard "Lord British" Garriott, co-creator of Dungeons & Dragons the late Gary Gygax and Toastmaster Brad Strickland. Miramar recording artist Jonn Serrie delivered his keyboard arrangements from within a real NASA flightsuit and Michael Moorcock jammed onstage with Blue Öyster Cult's Eric Bloom, performing the Moorcock-written tunes "Veteran of the Psychic Wars" and "Black Blade". The late Thomas E. Fuller's Atlanta Radio Theatre Company performed H. P. Lovecraft's "The Call of Cthulhu" live at the con and on live radio.

Aeneas (talk) 21:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

All of the individuals with "late" in front of their names were actually at the convention. H. P. Lovecraft was not at the convention; his work was read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.98.112 (talk) 07:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

2009 Controversies with Blind Ferret Entertainment

On December 11th, 2009 The Consumerist reported on Blind Ferret Entertainment's ordeal with Dragon Con. Some feel this should be cited on their entry within Wikipedia, some do not. I personally believe it should be, as it is a current issue with the convention itself, and while some do see Blind Ferret Entertainment as a small bump in the road, the titles it is associated with are not. Considering that Blind Ferret Entertainment is associated with Ctrl+Alt+Del, and that specific entity sponsors the Digital Overload LAN party, which every year has grown larger and larger then the previous.

Let's discuss this one. =) PheobusKilathos (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I said that I thought this disagreement was minor in scope and not significant enough to warrant inclusion... that discussion is on my talk page. Like any good Wikipedian, I yield to consensus. Also, I dislike pickles. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I've returned the relevant part of the copy to the article. It's sourced, and seems to have grown beyond a simple spat. - JeffJonez (talk) 21:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

It all looks pretty parochial to me, and not really of encyclopedia-article importance. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:04, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

It's definitely trivial, and even mentioning it was undue emphasis. I do wish, though, that somebody hadn't whitewashed out the mention that D*C usurped the traditional weekend for the Worldcon, to the irritation of people who actually read the stuff. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll concede that one bad experience, however public, isn't of major import to the article, but my admittedly quick reading of undue emphasis has me wondering about majority/minority opinions. The kerfuffle is a minor event with a minor writeup, but it isn't a minority "view" as such, since the facts themselves don't seem to be in dispute. - JeffJonez (talk) 22:00, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I read WP:UNDUE as warning us that coverage should be proportionate to the subject's importance. Realistically: is there a con on the face of the planet which has never had somebody unhappy with their placement in the huckster's room? This is a micro-issue of utter triviality in the context of the many more important issues which the rise of D*C represents. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:05, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Honestly I think if anything this is better posted on BFE's listing rather than Dragon Con. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pagan3000 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

When is Dragon Con Held?

When is DragonCon held? What month(s), historically? This essential information is not in the article.Enon (talk) 02:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Article said "Labor Day weekend".I linked Labor Day, and clarified "usually the first weekend in September". Any clarification on whether it could be the last weekend in August would help. It seems likely, but calendar math can be weird.Enon (talk) 03:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

"The first weekend" or "the last weekend" in a month isn't even a well-defined concept, since a weekend can easily fall in more than one month. So there's no way to describe it more concisely than "the weekend preceding the first Monday in September," which seems a touch awkward to me. I'd say let people follow the hyperlink to "Labor Day" if they need that level of detail. 71.192.115.15 (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Update

This article had been tagged for awhile, so I went in and did some cleanup today, updating things and adding sources. For the record, I have a potential conflict of interest here, since I am a regular guest at Dragon*Con, but I did my best to keep things neutral. If there are additional sources desired for anything, please tag those sections with {{cn}} and we'll get them updated. --El on ka 00:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I changed a couple of things in the lede, but most of your stuff seems okay. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. The reason I removed the "for profit" part from the lead, is that I saw it was already in the infobox. I have no objection to re-adding that line though. --El on ka 00:21, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

It's literally fine print in the infobox; I felt that since the lede included the assertion that they use all these volunteers, it seemed NPOV-appropriate to mention that they are volunteering for somebody else's profit. By the way: since you say you've been there, have you attended any of the local non-profit cons like Chattacon or LibertyCon? --Orange Mike | Talk 00:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Not familiar with those, sorry. I'm in St. Louis, so just fly in for Dragon*Con, and then fly back out afterwards. --El on ka 00:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

And we love you for it Elonka! (especially the way you put up with the bad timeslots, I knew mine was bad this year, but your GGJ one was right after and you were STILL cheery on a Monday afternoon!) Ktetch (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Title change

The official title of the event is "Dragon*Con", though of course it is spelled in lots of different ways in other sources. Would there be any objection to moving it from its current title of Dragon Con to Dragon*Con? --El on ka 17:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm wondering whether this is not the most commonly used spelling for the name; as you know, under the principle of least surprise, common usage trumps official spelling. After all, there is already a redirect under the version with the asterisk in it. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:58, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

True. In searching through sources (Google Books, Google Scholar, and library databases such as Newsbank), there are multiple spellings of the name, with the most common ones (that I saw) appearing to be split roughly between "DragonCon" and "Dragon*Con", with "Dragon Con" as another prominent, though less frequently used, spelling. Regarding the "surprise" principle, I have to say that I was surprised to see the article titled "Dragon Con", since I'm more used to "DragonCon" and "Dragon*Con". If there were a clear preference for "DragonCon" or "Dragon*Con", I'd say move to one of those, but since it seems fairly split, I'd say that moving it to the official title would make the most sense. --El on ka 18:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Can I go ahead with the move? Or would an RM be better? --El on ka 16:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

And it's officially now "Dragon Con" after the Ed Kramer split, so I moved it back. If nothing else, that'll make it easier to type on my phone- I could never seem to teach it "Dragon*Con". Disavian (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dragon Con. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.dragoncon.org/history.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:53, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Should there be mention of the Dragon Awards?

They seem to be getting some decent coverage. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

attendance numbers

Should there be a list of yearly attendance numbers? I'm not sure where you could get them, and I'm sure the last few years would be estimates. I know it was announced at the dead dog this year that there were over 77,000 at d*con 2016, and I recall it was over 74,000 last year. Dead dog announcements are about as official a number as you'll get without inside information from registration 198.223.200.200 (talk) 11:10, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the yearly attendance numbers are listed in the History section. Unless a reliable source can be found for them, I don't think there should be a list. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:49, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dragon Con. 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/20080602020112/http://www.dragoncon.org:80/dc_events.php to http://www.dragoncon.org/dc_events.php#Parade
Corrected formatting/usage for http://mediarelations.dragoncon.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/DragonConFactSheet2016.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Dragon Con. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 13 September 2017 (UTC)