This convention has a lot of controversy, could this line be less biased, and additional examples be added to form a 'controversy' sub-topic?
"Sexually-oriented promotional material billed FOXmas as "the most important event in furry history". Some took this hyperbole and the website graphics at face value, leading to clarification from the event's organizers. "
--184.108.40.206 16:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
This reference is rubbish:
"2.↑ Free alcohol will only be in the form of Frozen Oasis cocktails; mixed drinks are extra"
--220.127.116.11 16:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- If you feel the article could be improved, you are welcome to give it a go yourself. The use of a "reference" there was to avoid having a separate "notes" section - you can however construct one by using (for example) <ref group="note">...</ref> and then <references group="note" /> under a separate section. The source for that statement was the radio interview. --GreenReaper(talk) 16:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- I fixed that "reference". Maybe we should have a section we can point editors to (do we have one already?) that describes how references work. --Douglas Muth 16:55, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Under Organization, the following was added:
It developed from Christmas parties at Soron's house, which attracted 55 furs in 2008.
Can this tidbit be moved to a more relevant location in the article?
--18.104.22.168 19:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
The Wikify edit introduces overformatting and spelling errors, so it keeps being undone.
--22.214.171.124 23:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- I think what the editor here is getting at with overformatting is that the flow is being broken up by too many headers. In general headers should be added only when it is reasonable to expect that more information will be added. Personally I think one for the GoH is overdoing it, but I can understand it for the separate "controversy" items because more could be added to each section, drawing from those events. --GreenReaper(talk) 23:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- Exactly the point for the controversy section. Ican/will move the goh section to the main body, and check the grammar-Spirou 00:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
The relevance of being SA's link of the day twice is pretty astounding. Combine that with the fact it was instrumental in the undoing of the con, and it's noteworthy stuff. The contoversy and its timeline tells the tale of FOX-mas. The reason there isn't much else on FOXmas itself is because there is not a lot of material on the convention itself that can be cited. --126.96.36.199 21:12, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Proof of 2010 con?
I'll just quote the website here: "ANNOUNCEMENT - FOXmas 2009 has been called-off. However, FOXmas 2010 is already in the planning-phase. More details to come." and later on, "Hope to see you all at FOXmas 2010, and have a happy and safe holiday season." I'm not the best writer, but I think that should be noted. --188.8.131.52 20:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- That sounds like it was posted shortly after FOXmas 2009 was cancelled, and doesn't really tell us anything we don't already know. But if you find more recent information, by all means update the article to reflect it. --mwalimu 22:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)