Talk:Sakura-Con

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anime and manga: Conventions Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Conventions work group.

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

What does Sakura mean?

Could someone explain what "Sakura" means, please? - Eyeresist 03:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sakura means Cherry Blossom in Japanese. Megapixie 03:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ANCEA

ANCEA should be split off into its own entery --TheFarix 21:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put all of the information about ANCEA in the trivia section for now. It should be fine there until someone with enough knowledge creates a stub for it. But for now, there just isn't enough to justify a separate article. --TheFarix 00:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the point is now moot, since recently they voted to merge the two entities into a single board. Roninbk 17:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could somebody please redirect the titles "Sakura Con" and "Sakuracon" so that they come to this page. "Sakura-Con" is the correct spelling but we (ANCEA) own the copywrite to all three spellings. Alinda Sue 19:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sakuracon and Sakura Con already redirect to Sakura-Con, and have since March 27 2006 --RoninBK_ETC 23:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandilization

http://www.dreamtheaterforums.com/index.php?topic=20345.0 Looks like a Dream Theater internet forum wanted to add their own little picture --71.141.108.78 06:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But is it really vandilization if the pic is relevant? 68.36.93.133 17:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with the picture, it's not vandalism, and I have reverted the removal (via WP:UNDO). -- RoninBK _{T C} 23:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How the hell did you find that, anyway? TalonTheater 02:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A member of our forums is in the picture and provided it. Enigma00 02:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever keeps removing the picture, please stop. Revert wars are dumb. If you have a problem, discuss it. Constantly deleting it makes YOU the vandal. 68.36.93.133 21:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This wheel war (which I am not a part of editing) has been reported to AN. ...so stop. --PatrickD 19:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war or revert war (a "wheel war" is something only admins can shamefully engage in). Page now protected from editing by non-established editors until the problems are sorted here. REDVERS ↔ SЯEVDEЯ 20:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grr, tried to revert to a version without vandalism, but I only reverted to one that has less vandalism (and was deeper in the page), but it should have done enough to make manual cleanup easier. --Alphamone (talk) 22:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

kay, found a proper vandalism free version and reverted to it, now we can only pray that it stays reasonably nonsense free. --Alphamone (talk) 22:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A request for page protection has been filed. Given the recent flury, it should be an open and shut case. --Farix (Talk) 22:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AnimeCons data

I'm not sure if the current format/organization of the links to this data is appropriate here. Maybe it should be changed into prose? Or even something like: AnimeCons.con Data - 1998 1999 2000, etc. Kopf1988 22:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The infamous commercial

I think the infamous Sakura-Con 2009 commercial has to be mentioned, even if it's just the fact that it became an Internet meme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.129.2.148 (talk) 02:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to check the article, but the fact that Sakura-Con does commercials may be worth mentioning. But this this particular one isn't anything special and isn't a meme outside of your average 4chan stupidity. The only reliable source that even talks about it is from ANN. --21:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

No, it's worth mentioning. As with most things 4chan get a hold of, it's well-known now for being slightly OTT. Tobz1000 (talk) 14:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this particular commercial is mentioned in the article, it will only be the context of its portrayal of anime fans. Why? Because that is the angle that reliable sources covered. The 4chan meme isn't even mentioned. But is it relevant to the topic of Sakura-Con? I really don't think so. --Farix (Talk) 15:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GIRUGAMESH

What the Hell is all thGIRUGAMESH about? 86.43.178.17 (talk) 17:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Girugamesh was one of the bands that appeared at Sakura-Con 2009. Some lame trolls from 4chan got a hold of it and started vandalizing both articles. --Farix (Talk) 17:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unneccesary?

I would like to discuss the removal of the (with parents) in regards to infants attending the con. I believe the comment is necessary to help point out that a minor policy is in place for the convention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SeijinDinger (talk • contribs) 09:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the whole statement is unnecessary as it is true for all cons and nothing something unique to Sakura-Con. Also, Wikipedia isn't a place to cover a conventions policies. --Farix (Talk) 10:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough SeijinDinger (talk) 12:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Potential sources

I know some of Sakura-Con's staffers monitor this article, so I like to request that they list any coverage the convention has received from reliable, third-party sources. In particular, sources that detail the history of the convention, describes the convention's and programming, documented influences, and if possible, the organizational structure. I like to try to see if I can expand this article a bit more with these sources and hopefully get close to it being classed as a Good Article. --Farix (Talk) 22:31, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will work with the Elmira, Director of Publicity (I am the assistant) on getting you that list. It may be a few weeks as we are currently less than 2 weeks from the show and have a million stuff we are doing. Also how would you like the Con Structure formatted? SeijinDinger (talk) 22:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's already there needs to be sourced. Currently the link given is dead or need updated. But it also needs more then one source to support the whole section. There should be press releases or some other report about the merger of the ANCEA and the Sakura-Con Executive Board. But it should answer questions, such as, did the ANCEA exists before Sakura-Con or was the ANCEA created to be the business side of Sakura-Can? How has the structure changed over the years? The organizational structure section will be a hard one to write as we don't have any examples to go by. It may not even be necessary to reach GA-class. --Farix (Talk) 01:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have aimed the con structure part at the Convention Secretary, and after the con happens we can get you information about Press Releases, and Media coverage. I can however answer that ANCEA was set up in 1998 as the Governing Body of Sakura-Con. But will need to find archival documentation for all that, as it may not be online. As for the Merger It is listed in General Meeting Minutes, just I am not sure which ones, and if the initial proposal is documented online or not. SeijinDinger (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

Remember to maintain this article as written from a neutral, encyclopedic perspective. It's looking pretty good right now, but articles like these have a tendency to become more like advertisements or promotions (especially with Sakura-Con staff being able to edit the article). Just be aware of that as you make edits; be especially careful that you're not making the article biased. Sometimes it comes down to something as simple as, for example, a phrase like "fun activities" being replaced with "activities", because the "fun" descriptor is opinionated and biased in favor of the activities. 24.15.197.87 (talk) 04:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further examination, I saw that the "Programming" section needed to be rewritten for neutrality. I did so, while retaining all of the included information (which needs to be citated--see below). 24.15.197.87 (talk) 04:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed

All articles on Wikipedia must have citations to verify information. This one is lacking them, especially in the "Programming" section, where there are no citations at all (but a lot of presented facts). If you're a moderator of the event, and you add information because you've planned it, at least cite yourself. 24.15.197.87 (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ok to cite specific sections of the website that covers programming for such events as the AMV Contest, Cosplay, etc? Those sections of the site would have the most current up to date information per year (I run the AMV Contest, but wanted to ask before just doing it) SeijinDinger (talk) 02:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the citing warning as i think that its properly cited.. least lot better then before and i didnt think that that kind of warning was needed...Daitenchi (talk) 17:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2009 attendance

16,586 is the correct number as being released with the permission of the Director of Membership we are currently re-working the history page on the Sakura-Con website and hope to have that up and running shortly SeijinDinger (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One question

If the Sakura-Con and the organization that support it is trying to educate people about Asian culture, why is it mainly about Japan? It sounds like this is more of a Japanese convention than an "East Asian" convention. Can anyone mind explaining this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.94.226 (talk) 01:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]