Talk:AnimalCon

Is this a hoax?
I'm going to have to question whether this convention actually existed or not. --Giza 02:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * First, I tried Googling for 'animalcon' and 'mexico' and could not find any matches.
 * Second, searching for animalcon.org and animalcon.com on The Wayback Machine failed to turn up anything.
 * Third, I checked the status of those domain names with WHOIS, and neither domain name is registered. I suppose other domain names could have been used, but I find it odd that the two most likely ones weren't used, and show no signs of having ever been used.


 * I tried every data and word combo, and the only match I get is for "animal Control." Maybe the user can provide more data so we can expand on it. Even gone, with the site's name we can use the Wayback Machine to pull some info for this entry. Spirou 03:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Concur spd, no proof of existence. Also tried many other search engines but still not found. -- DeVandalizer 19:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Concur spd. Spaz Kitty 08:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I think this is bogus
I Googled for "animalcon", and the first 4 matches I found were from these "Umgotts Destroy" / "OMGWTF! Furries" people. The 5th was an LJ post from Slimgatsby, the guy who created this article.

Going to the con's "website" (http://www.umgotts.com/ac/index.html) only brings up a single page, with advertisements for Slimgatsby's videos. I don't see anything much in the way of supporting evidence that comes from anyone else.

Quite frankly, I think the contents of this entire article of nothing more than fiction created by its author, in an attempt to try and sell his movies. Allowing this article to remain would do a disservice to the Wiki and as such, I think it should be deleted. --Douglas Muth 05:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It was. :-) --GreenReaper(talk) 05:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Did you even read the page it linked to? AnimalCon was held in early March.  It wasn't a BIG con, but it was a con nonetheless. The page is hosted on the same website as Umgotts Studios, which is what paid for the event. --S.Gatsby


 * Also, let me just say: Long Island Furs Furmeet Index. Neener neener =P.  I'm trying to contribute to the Wiki and the fandom as a whole and stay within your boundaries, it is quite frustrating when I'm treated like a troll every time I post. --S.Gatsby


 * We don't think you're trolling. We do think you are trying to use WikiFur inappropriately as a vehicle to promote your commercial project and to inflate the notability of the people behind it. There is a difference, and it's why you are not banned yet. :-)


 * With all due respect to your local furry community, a one-day furry video shoot with local furs funded by your commercial organization does not a convention make (if it did, then the Manchester division of the NorthernFurs would have had several already, along with numerous other furry groups around the world - and the Funday PawPet Show would count as a convention virtually every week).


 * Describing such an event as a convention is disingenuous to those who spend long hours working to please hundreds or thousands of people at once. Definitions differ, and we've been prepared to let them slip on occasion for events which are the only furry meet in their country, but some combination of regularity/dealer attention/national attendance/public registration payments is require to fit the category. This is at most a furmeet or one-shot event, and personally, I think that it should be mentioned as part of the article about the film. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, then, may we restore it and in the article make a distinction between the metafiction AnimalCon versus "The AnimalCon Furmeet," which we presently are attempting to regularly repeat until we can form an actual Long Island-based furry con?


 * That seems reasonable enough. What we don't want is fiction mixing with fact, or fact being inflated with fiction. This is an encyclopedia, and the difference between fictional and real events should be made clear to the reader. It's like the User: and main namespace dichotomy - what you put in the User: article about yourself is pretty much up to you, but the main namespace is not a good place for in-jokes. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * And not for nothing, but my posts aren't limited to "inappropriately using wikifur to promote my [so-called] commercial project." I've contributed in other areas as well -ex, starting the podcast section with a number of furry podcasts.   S.Gatsby


 * Yes, I see what you did there. Two of the three links you added were to your own work. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It has been updated since, actually. I originally had 2 and/or Spaz's RSS feeds up there, too...with a possible fourth, it's been a while since I first put it up. Maybe something by Kutz?  I could have sworn there was more than that.   S.Gatsby


 * It's subsequently been added to by others, certainly, though I am unconvinced that all or any of them meet the criteria of "particular prominence in the furry fandom" - especially since most of them appear to have added themselves in. We should probably put up a note about that. --GreenReaper(talk) 07:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Just because you keep repeating this doesn't make it true.
 * The fact remains that Google turns up well... nothing that was not written by you. If this really was a con, I'd expect to see con reports, pictures, and comments by other people.  --Douglas Muth 13:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Pictures, courtesy of Nekonaru_Letao: http://web.mac.com/nekonaru.letao.2901/iWeb/Site/AnimalCon%202007.html  Also please note the link above indexing the con as a prominent Long Island furmeet. Sgatsby 00:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)