Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circle Square (Animation)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. North America1000 12:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Circle Square (Animation)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:GNG. There are no independent sources covering the subject in-depth. Cartoon Brew is only independent source and only has a passing mention. Slywriter (talk) 11:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Comics and animation. Slywriter (talk) 11:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * What independent sources are you looking for?
 * There are numerous independent references to the show in the links - including in the independent animation press - and including to the actual programme pages on international network pages. MilosMaccy (talk) 11:51, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Except for the Cartoon Brew article, which is a passing mention — less than a full sentence, in fact — the sources are all either press releases, simple program listings, or lists of nominees for a non-notable award which Circle Square didn't win. We need independent, in-depth coverage of this show — press releases, announcements, or database entries are insufficient. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 12:37, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey I'm not an editor of Wiki so apologies if the page isn't tip top.
 * I will say the idea that the British Animation Awards are non-notable is certainly a subjective viewpoint and certainly not shared with the British animation industry!
 * Other references to the show include the
 * British Film Institute - who funded the show - through a rigorous selection process
 * https://www.bfi.org.uk/news/latest-young-audiences-content-fund-production-slate-announced
 * Cardiff Animation Festival - which featured a 90 minute masterclass on the show and a screening
 * https://www.cardiffanimation.com/circle-square-masterclass
 * https://www.cardiffanimation.com/circle-square-screening
 * with the funding of the primary screen training organistion here in the UK
 * https://www.screenskills.com/information-and-resources/masterclass/circle-square-masterclass-for-aspiring-animation-writers/
 * https://www.screenskills.com/news/british-animation-award-nominations-for-skills-fund-contributors/
 * The show doesn't have a big presence in the broadsheets because they rarely talk about kids TV, and the tens of thousands of kids who watch the show don't have social media accounts to talk about the show because - well - they're 4 years old. This page was meant as a resource for interested parents because as a parent I often use Wikipedia to look up information on other kids tv shows. It was mentioned in the Guardian a few years back during it's earlier phase of development in reference to British Tax breaks.
 * https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/apr/13/british-cartoon-industry-cbeebies-boom-tax-break
 * Animation Ireland
 * https://animationireland.com/kavaleer-productions-are-in-production-with-circle-square/
 * Animation Magazine
 * https://www.animationmagazine.net/tv/9-story-distribution-gets-hip-with-mcleod-bros-circle-square/ MilosMaccy (talk) 16:06, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources show existence, not notability which is when third parties take note of existence, usually in the form of reviews or othet extended coverage of the subject. Slywriter (talk) 12:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 20:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG. The Brothers McLeod article is also problematic and promotional. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.