Specifically, the following:
 

• The franchise must have had one release between the instance of the noscon and the game that the noscon is intended to follow (This would make Metroid Fusion exempt; it was released the same day as Metroid Prime. BC:Rearmed would also be exempt).
  

• A remake is not a Noscon. It is a new game that directly follows a predecessor, not a remake of. (This would make BC:Rearmed exempt)

Ehh why does this "concept" even exist? This concept is in no way objective.

" Ehh why does this "concept" even exist? This concept is in no way objective. "

Isn't this concept based on relativity rather than cold-hard fact?

@Cypher I would agree that a remake is NOT a NosCon. 
You bring up a key factor of the NosCon: that time has passed between the franchise hayday and this current release. Metroid Prime and Metroid Fusion came out on the same day? That means they were both the first Metroid games released since Super Metroid. They aren't NosCons because neither game represents a deviation from years and years of other 3D work. A NosCon is also pitched as a kind of "return to form" for the game franchise, while the release of Prime/Fusion is just....a return of an old franchise. 
Good effing points all!

Going back over the list, there are a bunch of games that shouldn't be there. Punch Out has no business being there. The last Punch Out game was Super Punch Out and that is done in the same style. Qix? Has the been a wild expansion in the Qix universe that they had to go back to the original? Same with Space Invaders. Pac Man has at least had a lot of other shitty platformers and other stupid shit, so it counts

Suikoden Tierkreisis also shouldn't be there. There was never a game in the Suikoden franchise such as Tierkreisis. It is not a return to form in any way. Yes, it is simpler, but also completely new for the franchise.

This is a concept that was funny and timely on the Bombcast but absolutely doesn't need to be a part of the wiki. There are some novel ideas here, but there's a lot of it that's totally subjective, as others have said.
 
Saying that a NosCon is banking on nostalgia is not always right. I'm a big Mega Man fan who plays the old games on a regular basis and considers them to be the best in the series. Mega Man 9 wouldn't have needed the nostalgia to sell me. 
 
The naming section is wrong, but I like the spirit behind the idea. Mega Man 9 is called such because it is the sequel to Mega Man 8, not Mega Man Battle Network 4. Of course it's going to ignore those other games, as they don't have much to do with the original series MM9 is a part of. This would be better served as something like "Long-Coming Sequel."
 
I had to edit out part of the gameplay section, as it listed Mega Man 9 as having "bad controls." They are not, but it's not a wiki's place to tell you either way.
 
And then there's cases like the Rebirth games. For Castlevania in particular, it's essentially just a re-imagining of one of the worst games in the entire series. I'd like to find a person who is nostalgic for the Castlevania Adventure and knock some sense into them.
 
It's also so specific and complicated as to be nearly useless.  "A game has to have at least X other games in the series" or "X type of graphics" is a way to get a lot of people to misjudge what it's about and add inaccurate games to the list, as has already happened. We already have the Deliberately Retro concept, which is much more neutral and doesn't make any judgments about what the appeal of a game is. Leave that to user reviews, not wiki concepts.

The more I think about it, the more I feel the noscon term was a joke and shouldn't be taken seriously. This isn't a "truthiness" moment here. Ryan didn't pull a Colbert.