Talk:Caillou/Archive 2

Caillou Gets Grounded
This article mentions nothing about the Caillou episodes where he gets grounded. These episodes can be found on YouTube, so don't dare say the episodes do not exist! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.76.203.137 (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The episodes do not exist. Yes, people take material from existing shows and edit them into ... whatever, but those are not episodes of the show. We don't discuss them in the article because reliable sources don't discuss them. That means A) they're trivial and B) we have nothing verifiable to say about them. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Then why is there still trivia of Caillou being grounded in GoAnimate and Plotagon videos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.11.185.62 (talk) 15:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I hadn't noticed that was there. Another user (thanks, ) has now removed it. There is an insane amount of content on youtube (and elsewhere). The overwhelming majority of it is not noteworthy. Unless independent reliable sources discuss it in the context of discussing the subject you are thinking of adding it to, that video of someone flattening a flaming jack-o-lantern with a hydraulic ram simply doesn't belong on Wikipedia. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, that's not productive. Two editors agree that the material is of trivial importance to the history of the show. Another editor wants to include it and restores it without explanation.


 * IMO, this is an "in popular culture" issue. Let's compare them to material about Richard Nixon. Nixon is the subject of an opera (touring Europe and North America prior to its production at the Metropolitan Opera, released as an album five separate times), a top 10 album by a Grammy-winning artist album, as top 20 single by a Grammy-winning band, numerous films (with numerous Oscars) and he is a recurring character in a long-running, Emmy-winning cartoon. Out of all of these, zero merit mention in the Richard Nixon article (though each item is notable in its own right, along with the artists behind the works.


 * We are comparing all of those works with copyright violations posted to youtube by junior high school students. They simply do not belong here. They are not significant to the show. Independent reliable sources discussing the show do not discuss the videos. One WP:SPS discusses it. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

So is anyone going to get rid of that Go Animate trivia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FCC8:66CA:1400:4C6E:B8D2:4B18:8AD6 (talk) 00:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * has restored the material again. It is certainly time to discuss the issue. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Vote: Should we mention the "Caillou gets grounded" videos in passing?
This is a vote, not a general discussion forum. Comments in general are allowed, but they cannot constitute the majority of this vote.

We can discuss afterwards, or e can hold of voting until we have such a discussion.

When we vote, I will check in every few days.

I still haven't decided if I'll vote myself.

Phrase your stance anyway you'd like to (e.g.: "Support", "Oppose", "Weak support" "Not in favor", etc. etc.)

Please be civil.

Thanks for consideration.

The brave celery (talk) 14:06, 27 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia uses consensus, not voting. This is not a vote. Feel free to list your WP:!VOTE along with a policy/guideline based explanation.


 * Policy and guideline based discussion toward finding a WP:CONSENSUS, rather than being discouraged, is actively encouraged. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose - There are two problems here: verifiability and weight.


 * Verifiability, one of Wikipedia's pillars (the basis for the whole project) is that Wikipedia reports what independent reliable sources have to say about a subject. The subject here is the children's television show "Cailou". Independent reliable sources discussing the show have nothing to say about the meme. As a result, there's really nothing we can say about it. Material added that is not supported by a reliable source can be removed by any editor at any time.


 * Weight deals with how much attention we give to various aspects of a topic. Major aspects of the show: target audience, production, etc. are discussed by reliable sources quite frequently. Convince yourself of this by doing even the most basic web search on the show and see how easy it is to verify that yes, it is Canadian, an educational children's show and that the kid is four years old. Trivial points, such as copyright violations posted to youtube by junior high school students, are barely mentioned by anything that anyone could conceivably argue is a reliable source.


 * Oh, yes, there are websites and youtube videos about it. Those are not reliable sources. There are more websites saying the Queen of England is an alien-human hybrid than there are pages talking about the copyright violations produced by those kids. We do not -- obviously -- say that the Queen of England is part alien. Similarly, the fact that numerous kids on the web think these videos are fun to make does not mean we have anything to say about them. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Caillou. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224120153/http://www.seamonster.co.za/portfolio/caillou.html to http://www.seamonster.co.za/portfolio/caillou.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140117122938/http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillou to http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillou
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140324121406/http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillous-holiday-movie to http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillous-holiday-movie
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131010011412/http://www.caillou.com/parentsteachers/prog_recap3.shtml to http://www.caillou.com/parentsteachers/prog_recap3.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111118005722/http://thecookiejarcompany.com/press/cj_press_20100908.php to http://www.thecookiejarcompany.com/press/cj_press_20100908.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140117122938/http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillou to http://distribution.dhxmedia.com/catalogue/preschool/caillou
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111029191800/http://treehousetv.com/kids/games/play.aspx?ID=104 to http://treehousetv.com/kids/games/play.aspx?ID=104
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103105159/http://www.caillou.com/indexFR.shtml to http://www.caillou.com/indexFR.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

About the lead section
Actually, PBS also broadcasts Caillou. It broadcasts on the channel “PBS Kids”. (I don’t know when it stayed airing on PBS Kids) The problem is, there might not be a source for the previous 2 sentences. Can someone find a source, put in the information, and cite it? (I think it still airs, it might be a rerun, though) TheSmartPersonUS1 (talk) 06:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2018
This article states that the show was originally animated in Korea, but the credits show that it was actually animated by Morning Sun and later SMEC, which are/were based in China. RowenOwen (talk) 20:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  spintendo   05:30, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Caillou Gets Grounded listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Caillou Gets Grounded. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. NotCory (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Please add refrences to the GoAnimate videos!
Cailiou and other characters are featured in GoAnimate videos. Can you please add it in the criticism section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolsickle462 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Welcome to Wikipedia,.
 * We've discussed this previously. We still would need coverage in independent reliable sources which we still don't have. Please see Talk:Caillou/Archive_2, Talk:Caillou/Archive_2 and Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_10. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2019
In the youtube section is is specified that the WildBrain Spark shorts are mainly remakes of old episodes. This is now inaccurate - some episodes (in their initial batch) were remakes, but now they are largely brand new original stories - updated for the modern audience.

This series is also referred to as "Caillou's New Adventures" and published outside of Youtube and on Amazon Prime as well. Actually Caillou (talk) 14:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 20:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Album
I propose merging what can be sourced from Caillou's Favorite Songs into this article, Caillou. I don't know what that might be. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:23, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Simply Redirect, nothing of value here to merge. Onel 5969  TT me 11:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Nothing to save here. No independent notability, and not the definitive soundtrack. If someone wants to write a section on other media besides videos, then go for it. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:46, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2019
Split the episodes section into a new article called List of Caillou episodes 84.92.196.225 (talk) 12:14, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The section is currently very short. You can however submit a draft if you want to create a longer list of episodes. – Thjarkur (talk) 12:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2020
Add: “The show was renewed for a second season in 2003. ” 2601:8B:C300:4A70:5178:BDCD:6DFB:880B (talk) 19:02, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅: Your edit request has been added to the production section of the article. Donna Spencer talk-to-me ⛅ 20:37, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2020
split the episodes section into a new article called list of caillou episodes 86.139.42.179 (talk) 08:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The section is so short that there isn't a reason to do so yet. There is one draft in the works: Draft:List of Caillou episodes, but it doesn't appear to be very well sourced yet. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2020
I should edit it. Not view its source. 2604:2000:1700:1614:0:0:0:FC5 (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. &#8209;&#8209; El Hef  ( Meep? ) 19:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2020
===Minor characters===

159.180.250.103 (talk) 10:32, 5 October 2020 (UTC)


 * ❌. What are we supposed to do with this? In ay case, this is completely unsourced trivia. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 15:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Reception and controversy section
The vast part of the section is based on a single article by Tristin Hopper. There is no evidence presented that there are "extremely negative reviews", and especially not "worldwide". Same goes for the "many people" who "know" that the series has an "extremely negative influence on children".

All these claims are entirely sourced in Hopper's article. Therefore, it should be made clear that this is Hopper's opinion rather than stating it as a universally accepted fact.

In fact, if one does what Hopper suggests, namely google "caillou hate", it becomes quite clear that this whole Caillou hatred thing is:


 * 1) mainly an internet meme that has perpetuated and reinforced itself through the years
 * 2) mainly a United States (plus maybe English Canadian) phenomenon (google "caillou hate site:uk" for comparison)

The French language Wikipedia shows no sign that Caillou is "universally hated" (and Caillou is originally French Canadian). Same goes for various other language Wikipedias. If you google it in other languages, there is also no proof of "universally hatred" whatsoever.

I think one can safely assume that even in the US, most parents will probably have no special opinion about Caillou at all, and that there are probably at least as many who like it as there are parents who don't like it (see here). This is especially so in the non-US rest of the world. This hatred thing is mainly a meme on the internet, and as those who like Caillou or have no opinion about it won't be 'loud' on the internet about it, this grossly distorts what people actually think at large.

(Same goes for critics or reviewers, see here for instance.)

Apart from that, the main criticism Hopper (and the Caillou hatred meme people) are making isn't even true. If you watch the show, it is fairly obvious that Caillou is not a "brat" or "psychopath" or anything of the kind. He has a tantrum from time to time, as most 4 year olds do, but most of the time he neither "whines" nor behaves badly. He is just an ordinary boy. One may absolutely argue that nothing particularly "exciting" happens most of the time, but hey, that's the whole point of the show! It is supposed to show the everyday life of a four year old boy, his family, friends and the people around him from the perspective of a four year old child. The idea is that he explores the world, learns new things every day etc. The show achieves just that - it shows Caillou's life and especially how he experiences it. It especially emphasises the emotions Caillou has in the individual situations, and what he learns from it. Occasional tantrums are a normal part of a young child's behaviour, and there is no scientifically sound proof whatsoever (other than stated in Hopper's opinion) that Caillou has a negative influence on children. On the contrary, there have been many reviews that have found just the opposite; also this actual scientific study at the University of Virginia showed that it was clearly beneficial for children. Also, in virtually all cases where Caillou initially shows a 'bad' behaviour, he learns from it and grows. That's what growing up is all about and that is the very point of the show in the first place. The show was developed with the help of child psychologists (see here, here). Also, it was an early example of a children's show to depict diversity (for instance Jewish, Black, Chinese friends, see here).

(Just my personal opinion here: Maybe all this hatred originally just came from some parents who were stressed by a certain behaviour of their child and conveniently found a scapegoat in Caillou. And then, once it was a meme, the Caillou hatred developed a life of its own. Many of those perpetuating the meme probably aren't even parents but teenagers or twenty-somethings who just find it funny to add their own 2 cents to it. Also - again my personal opinion - I find it telling that it seems primarily a US thing. Some Americans (no generalization intended here, don't get me wrong, please!) seem to just want to have a TV show that educates their child for them by giving them a 'perfect' role model that their child is expected to copy. Funny enough, the publisher sees it exactly the same way - that it is not sensible to expect children "to be perfect, [...] to be superheroes" but that children are developing at their own pace and that it is therefore the very purpose to have Caillou behave like a normal child, and that it makes no sense to expect child characters on TV to be "role models who are just perfect".)

Therefore, unless someone adds proof to the above mentioned claims, I will edit the section so that it becomes clear that these are actually Tristin Hopper's opinion and neither "universal" nor "fact", and I'll add the above citations as counter-examples. Informatico (talk) 19:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Just saw that the University of Virginia study is even mentioned already in an earlier section. So, this already contradicts the claim that the show is "universally recognised as having a bad influence on children".


 * Also, the John Oliver example is just - none! Everyone who knows Last Week Tonight knows that this was meant to be a joke, just like his supposed hatred of Danbury, Connecticut or his preference of De Walt ladders over Werner ladders. It does not prove whether he actually likes Caillou or not at all. Informatico (talk) 19:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

"Legacy" section
The "Legacy" section of the article is totally unsourced, and I find it hard to consider it encyclopedic. I think someone more knowledgeable about the subject should improve or delete the section. Gildir (talk) 17:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Unless someone objects, I'll heavily condense that section. This is not more than a bit of trivia which at most touches the actual topic of this article. Also, I'll change the particularly nonsensical section title from Legacy to Parodies. Those memes on the internet (however funny they may appear to those who make and watch them - I perceived the few I watched as more of an anti-joke or intentionally bad dad joke) are definitely not the "legacy" of a show that's been running for decades all over the world. Informatico (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have removed it. Entirely WP:OR, and a surface for completely unrelated cruft. JAYFAX (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. Informatico (talk) 11:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I don’t understand
Upon what you removed the show's controversy section from the show’s main article, I have no idea how this stupid preschool cartoon is considered good, while the title character is portraying as a brat, which driven so many hate against the show like crazy. This makes no sense. Nobody likes spoiled brats, no matter what age they are! The haters says that this promotes kids to develop bad behavior, that’s not how preschool education programs works! The parents need their need their children to behave in order them to grow up. Four years old or not Caillou is, his parents should punish him instead of treating him like a god by praising his behavior in the unrealistic way possible! Throwing temper tantrums can’t get you what you want, that won’t solve either! And committing bad things is NOT growing up and a good thing! NO! It's wrong!! That’s not how it works like that! And it can get you in trouble big time if you do bad stuff like Caillou did in the show! I mean seriously, what’s wrong with those critics and parents?! Why would they have to praise the show, involving a little spoiled brat like Caillou that is considered a bad influence to the target audience, since the show’s premier?! That’s crazy! There’s no way the show would get some good critical reception over its dump concept. No way! Nobody wants to act and behave badly like Caillou. I mean give me a break. Whatta joke! Just why? Wiki-Ikiw (talk) 03:44, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The reason that was provided was that the content was WP:UNDUE, "Massively undue to base all this on two cites". I have to agree that only presenting two data points (however representative you think they are) is not appropriate.
 * You're making an assumption that the editor is claiming that is "good". Is there an aggregation site like rottentomatoes.com or metacritic.com? They weigh reviews of releases and give a normalized score.
 * Alternately, you could briefly summarize each of the two reviews, in the voice of the reviewers, rather than making a universal claim and using only the two reviews to support the claim. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:19, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

WHAT?
Okay, what the heck? So first off all, somebody just deleted the red links on my edit to Caillou. Isn't it better to just leave it there? Because there is a chance the red links will be created. I have no idea why my edit was reverted. Signed, Dinosaur   TrexXX33  (chat?) 16:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * We only add redlinks that are likely to become bluelinks. We do not leave all redlinks just in case they may become blue links some day. It's a fine line. See WP:REDLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:16, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

South Africa removal
A user named Undid keeps removing sourced content about South Africa co-producing it and I am sick and tired of repeating myself. That is why, per regulations, I'm waiting 24 hours to edit this article more. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 07:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Caillou is not a South African show for the same reason Spongebob SquarePants and Adventure Time are not Korean shows, Outsourced animation services do not affect the country of production, you're presenting a logical fallacy, just becuase it's sourced that a South African studio animated season 5 that doesn't mean it applies as a country of origin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undid (talk • contribs)
 * Wether or not South Africa had no involvement with the show is not your decision to make. Removing sourced content is still unacceptable. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 08:38, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * See my edits on SpongeBob SquarePants? that's how you look like, only using logical fallacies to win your argument — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undid (talk • contribs)
 * First off,, it is not wise to continue with the edit warring, especially when you have an edit warring report ongoing against you. As you've been warned already on your talk page, "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right."- I also highly suggest you take a look at the many recent warnings on your talk page and actually stop with this behavior.
 * Secondly, please keep WP:OSE in mind- what is done in one article does not dictate what is done in another, so there is no need to come over to SpongeBob SquarePants and start claiming the show is South Korean when it is clearly not (Especially when you change the lead to say it is 'American-Korean', which goes entirely against MOS:TVLEAD). Now I'm no expert on Caillou, but I believe the issue is that these are two different scenarios we are talking about:
 * According to the production section, the fifth season was co-produced with the South African animation studio.
 * In the case of SpongeBob, I believe the animation is outsourced to Rough Draft Korea, not co-produced with them as is the case with Caillou. In fact, based off of Template:Infobox television, I believe it is likely placed in the 'animator' parameter rather than 'company' due to the note: "The names of the production company or companies that funded/organized series production. Note: sub-contractors hired to perform production work, e.g. animation houses, special effects studios, post-production facilities etc. should not be included here, as this may create confusion about the nation(s) of origin. Instead, use sourced prose in the article's Production section to explain these details."
 * Now please stop, continuing to revert/edit war only increases your likelihood of a block. Magitroopa (talk) 09:38, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

https://www.toonboom.com/community/success-stories/clockwork-zoo redirects for me to https://www.toonboom.com/community so this fails verification. I have marked the reference as such. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:08, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should add, I'm checking from a desktop browser and I'm located in Canada, if that makes any difference. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:09, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This argument turned out to be pointless since Undid was actually OriginalMouseTrap101 evading its block. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 02:01, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2021
The letter C is not part of the vowels so the letter c dosen't come after the word an Clip877876 (talk) 09:01, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please be specific about where the error is. RudolfRed (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably this edit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)