Talk:No Brand Con

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-02-05. The result of the discussion was Keep.

This article is part of WikiProject Wisconsin, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Wisconsin.

[edit] Possible sources

• Vehling, Aaron. "Hard work puts on No Brand Con 2", The Spectator, University of Wisconsin, April 3, 2003.

• Brosky, Ken. "'Laughing Boy' makes second appearance at No Brand Con 2", The Spectator, University of Wisconsin, April 7, 2003.

• Dakins, Erica. "UW-Eau Claire hosts third annual No Brand Con", The Spectator, University of Wisconsin, March 15, 2004.

• Adams, Sara, Jeremy Gragert. "The gathering", The Spectator, University of Wisconsin, April 11, 2005.

[edit] Original Research Issue

Being a member of this group, I know that No Brand Con planning staff are notorious for not distributing press releases. As a result, secondary, verifiable sources are few and far between. Even reliable sources, such as AnimeCons.com, are often fed by No Brand Con staff, backed up by information readily available on the website.

I believe the self-referencing sources that are used fall under the first exception for: WP:SELFPUB#Using_questionable_or_self-published_sources. Due to their inherently self-referencing nature, NoBrandVerse specifics and other details are not published outside of the convention website, internal convention materials, or myriad video sources (sometimes available on YouTube and similar sites, where applicable).

I suppose what can fall under contention here is whether or not the inclusion of such details is relevant to an encyclopedia entry. I think the fact that No Brand Con has a continuous, annual storyline is academically interesting, and can be used to compare against otehr conventions. But, again, the proper details can only be found in con-referenced materials, as already (properly) cited. SeanOrange 20:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Although I don't dispute that No Brand Con itself is worthy of a Wikipedia article, I don't believe that the NoBrandVerse information should be taking up so much of the article. Unless there are third-party sources for this information, it seems to go against WP:RS. The only sources listed for that section are No Brand Con itself...which is essentially a self-published source. Perhaps marking this as "original research" isn't the most appropriate choice of tags, but I felt that it qualified considering that it was all either unsourced or referring to NBC's own site. --PatrickD 23:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

That's what I thought you were getting at. I think it should suffice to say that the con has storylines and has characters, and leave it at that, yes? That's what I get for building on what came before and getting carried away, I guess... hahaha ~ SeanOrange 00:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)