From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

why are the updates involving the fact it was unregistered by LPP Illionois are constantly being erased with no clear reason????[edit]

since a month I am trying to make a real update on the legal side of issue but the user Heather and Bong warrior keep hiding and tilting the angle on the article!

First, please do sign your posts. Second, for everybody here: As long as there's documentation--and I should hope legal records count for Wikipedia purposes, here--it would be of interest. Knowing what does happen at a convention behind the scenes, if there are some acceptable sources for this it does need to be covered. Werhdnt (talk) 07:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Cause of the 17,000$ fiasco[edit]

"The convention itself also began to experience unexpected financial difficulties: the staff of the Renaissance abruptly informed a DashCon staff member that they would need to pay $20,000 upfront for the use of the facilities, or shut the convention down. DashCon organizers had previously and contractually negotiated to pay the venue gradually throughout the convention, using ticket sales, rather than issuing an upfront payment."

This makes it sound as if the Hotel Management almost extorted them, the two sources for this section, are news articles which cast doubt on the validity of this sequence of events. In the official statement from DashCon they admit that the issue was related to an error in their understanding of the contract. This section should be update to reflect that. (BillTrok (talk) 03:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC))

On Wikipedia, independent, third-party sources, like the news articles, trump non-independent, first-party sources, like the blog post in question. It would be up to DashCon LLP to clean up the PR disaster that was this convention, not us. 23W 04:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
@BillTrok: That being said, I think this piece about their response would be good to include. If you can cite it in the article, I'd be willing to proofread it. Right now I added it as "further reading" at the bottom of the article. 23W 04:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2014[edit]

Dashcon has since been rebranded as Emoti-con and will take place at the Indiana Convention Center in Indianapolis in 2015. (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Not done We have that link, but we can't really confirm that this is DashCon re-branded. It looks like it's being held by several of the same people who put together DashCon, but we can't automatically say that it is the same convention at this point in time. Emoti-Con seems to be aimed at Internet culture in general and not specifically Tumblr themed. I can't really find anything about Emoti-Con other than the primary page and non-usable sources (social media rumors, etc), so I'd say that we should leave it off the page for now. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Basically, we can't guarantee that this is the con rebranded. We have no true official confirmation of any of it. When/if we get that, we can always create a mention but until that point we can't really list it here. In other words, we simply play the waiting game. If Emoti-Con is held and we get coverage confirming that it's a quick renaming, then we can specifically add this to the article. Until then we have to give it the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't intended as DC relaunched. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。)
  • I've been watching for coverage and we've finally had something commenting on the whole Emoti-Con business: Daily Dot. It's not the best RS we could have, but it is usable as a RS and I've now added the information to the article. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
  • It looks like the organizers have addressed this and to be neutral, I've included this in the article as well. I also moved it to a separate section, as the reply from the DashCon/Emoti-Con organizers makes it a little too lengthy for the lead. I also figure it will likely gain more coverage once the convention hits (if it hits) then we can put the additional coverage there. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Why is this on Wikipedia?[edit]

Although this is somewhat interesting, I'm not seeing how this is something encyclopedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pellea72 (talkcontribs) 05:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

It was the subject of non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources, for one thing, easily meeting the standard of notability. But beyond that I'd say it's notable and encyclopedic as one of the most prominent examples of an IRL event associated with a popular Internet platform gone horribly wrong. Basically, it's to fandom conventions what Heaven's Gate, or Ishtar or Cleopatra or (best of all) Caligula are to movies. Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)