Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circus Bazaar Magazine


 * 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 delete. Consensus suggests that there is not enough significant coverage from independent reliable sources provide the quality of notability for this magazine. Joyous! | Talk 05:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Circus Bazaar Magazine

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

Nominating because the magazine only has superficial coverage in other locations. 180.150.37.213 (talk) 21:38, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Completing nomination of behalf of nominator. Above text is copied from article talk page.  As for my view, article was created as a draft, and was given an AfC acceptance by an account which was blocked the next day due to sockpuppetry.  Article creator removed a prod tag applied by the above IP, in which the edit summary included "Also removed illegitimate delete request and noterity complaint based on an extortion attempt made against company by bad faith Wiki actors. Ref public complaints and posting of extortion claims online."  I have not yet analyzed the provided refs to form an opinion of my own on notability.  --Finngall talk  23:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - I've been unable to find sourcing which satisfies WP:GNG. Nearly all of the sourcing appears to be by unreliable sources or Circus Bazaar and its affiliated people, or otherwise doesn't provide in-depth coverage of the magazine itself. It's possible someone who can read Norwegian could do better. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 13:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Please re-examine the nature of the coverage in these references. Circus Bazaar Magazine has gained significant notoriety in the country of Norway as well as abroad. Many of these articles are not simply passing mentions but are built entirely on the output of the magazine and its production of various media. Circus Bazaar Magazine is a "news generator". Not simply reporting on events but because of the fact it is creating original media, other publications often report on the capital that is "created" by the magazine.
 * Also, many of these articles are in the Norwegian language so consideration must be given to this. Although the magazine is in English a native Norwegian is best to make any determination on its notoriety. Such as myself. At the end of the day, Circus Bazaar Magazine is an in-print serial publication with a decade-long history and is responsible for genuine social change through its work in the country of Norway. It is distributed by all the major bookstores and literary houses in Norway. It is also shelved in libraries all over the country and is distributed to subscribers and accademic institutions all over the world.
 * All proper publication information supporting this is incorporated into this article and I have added a multitude of supporting references that span National Swedish Media, most major media outlets in the country of Norway as well as several international media platforms such as Vice World News and CounterPunch.
 * The above statement that such sources are unreliable is absurd. Aftenposten, Nettivisen, TV2, Swedish National News to name just a few are some of the most credible news sources in Scandinavia and the references in question often allude to highly controversial and sensitive domestic political matters of which Circus Bazaar Magazine has been the producer. Such prestegious publications simply cannot be labelled as unreliable. They are the institutional back bone of media legitimacy here. That various references are based on internal sources to the magazine itself is a natural consequence of the fact that it is a producer of media and should be seen as a way to legitimise the reference from other publications. This is not a material product but creator of original non-material media capital. Its a Magazine.
 * By extention of this it is worth mentioning the various international film productions produced "entirely by the publication" and are distributed by international distributors worldwide and that now count in the millions of views. Is Wu Tang Clan not notable? (As just one example) The noteriety is clearly visable. This can easily be found by a simple look at the references given that link direct to distributors.
 * Finally and in referece to claims of "extortion attempts made against the company by bad faith Wiki actors". Yes being a budding Wiki Editor exposed to various online platforms in the country of Norway it is a simple task to observe the public publication of a multitute of threats being made to this publication of which is the basis of my first major article. It is interesting that such dates listed in the screenshots of the threats align nicely with the negetive attacks on the article. For reference please visit:
 * New to Oslo Facebook Group which is the primary platfrom for foreign speaking workers in the country
 * The Circus Bazaar Company Instagram Page.
 * My final point here is that I have created this page in good faith with a great deal of investigative work. But if it is so that the creation of a Wiki page will result in extortion attempts against whatever entity in question I next choose to work on then the platform it self becomes a risk. This is a poor insentive structure for the capturing of honest people who with to contribute to the overall project.
 * Monsieur Loya (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * gained significant notoriety in the country of Norway as well as abroad - It would be helpful if you could link, in this discussion, to the 3-5 best sources about Circus Bazaar (in any language). These would be sources which are about Circus Bazaar, and not about its affiliated people, published in reliable sources where neither the source nor author has any connection to Circus Bazaar. That would help participants here.
 * I don't think I understand the "extortion attempts" so won't comment on those.
 * It looks like literally all of your edits, in a number of articles, is to add content about people associated with Circus Bazaar. Do you have a connection to the subject? If so, you may want to see WP:PAID and WP:COI. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 20:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you.
 * Firstly to address your last point. No.
 * Is it not in the nature of things to expand beyong the created wikipedia article one would first create in order to give it strength and legitimacy? I thought this was the point. When researching one particular topic one ultimatley gains knowledge of other areas that are related, without the need for this to be due to a related interest. I chose this article for the fact that the magazine appears to have undergone a significant expansion and is now being sold accross the country of Norway. This was an obvious gap and a worthly first choice.
 * With regard to 3-5 sources. Let us take the most obvious example.
 * Circus Bazaar Magazine is responsible for the breaking of a huge and systematic case of police miscontuct in the country of Norway. This resulted in the prosecution of the Oslo Police District as an institution. Quite signifcant actually for a small country such as Norway. This small, new and obscurer platform documented and was the primary source of this whole (very public and controversial) social event. It investigated, advocated and ran this until its conclusion and to which a time it then syndicated all this material accross all the major news platforms in Scandinavia. All of which wrote many articles and interviewed the owner and editor on its investigation.
 * Nettivisen Norway: https://www.nettavisen.no/selv-drittsekker-skal-behandles-anstendig-av-politiet/s/12-95-3680934
 * Swedish National News: https://www.svt.se/nyheter/utrikes/oslopolisen-far-bota-for-tortyrliknande-arbetsmetoder
 * Vice World News: https://www.vice.com/en/article/kz5maz/batons-and-starlight-tours-norwegian-police-accused-of-breaking-anti-torture-conventions
 * Aftenposten Norway: https://www.aftenposten.no/oslo/i/m43O/oslopolitiet-godtar-ikke-foretaksstraff-etter-batong-episode
 * TV2 Norway: https://www.tv2.no/2015/01/30/nyheter/6513993
 * Point: The article in Vice World News is authored by the editor of Circus Bazaar Magazine but is obviousley edited by Vice World News Editorial Staff. Vice World News is by its very nature impartial and seperate from the subject. So I think this qualifies.
 * What needs to be also understood here is that these publications in question are not generating their own news. They are not mearly interviewing the editorial staff of Circus Bazaar Magazine. All material being referenced and diseminated here is based on the investigative reporting of Circus Bazaar Magazine itself.
 * Thank you and I hope this helps. Monsieur Loya (talk) 11:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying that you don't have a connection to the subject. Still, sorry to say, none of those sources are about Circus Bazaar. They are primarily about a police incident, and secondarily about the witness (someone involved with Circus Bazaar). There's almost nothing about the magazine. It's great that they got such a good scoop, but there's just not enough material to write a good article without relying on passing mentions or unreliable sources. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 12:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * All these articles refer to the magazine as the creator of this story and the information in these articles are based on interviews with the editor of the magazine. Should I rather attempt to write an article specifically on this "scoop" and then use Circus Bazaar Magazine as the primary reference for this article? Or would that then attract accusations that the sources are unreliable? With all respect, I do not understand this logic. If Circus Bazaar Magazine has a sufficiantly strong reputation and credibility basis for all these long standing news sources to follow in its investigative lead and completely reference it as a publication and film production house then I think it passes the test of a platform such as Wikipedia.
 * Noteriety as you seem to define it cannot be the only criteria for which an article is deserving. That wikipedia would build its credibility on something as fickle as a popularity contest does not inspire.
 * If a print publication that breaks stories as significant and well referenced as this (as one example) is deprived of a position inside the world "largest and most-read reference work in history" then we, and I am afraid yourself, are not doing our job as serious curators of the historical record.
 * I fundementally disagree with the sentiments here and hope my point here is taken seriously. Monsieur Loya (talk) 23:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have now added a further citation + quote to the article push home the significance of the case broken by Circus Bazaar Magazine.
 * The United States State Department Norwegian country report on Human Rights practices for 2013 would refer to this case under "Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" stating,
 * "The constitution and law prohibit such practices. In May two Oslo police officers were filmed examining a suspected drug dealer’s mouth and throat with a thin telescoping metal baton. In response to media reports and inquiries from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), the Oslo Police stated that such actions were legal. An earlier assessment by the Police University found the actions to be questionable since health personnel must conduct all bodily searches. The police launched an internal investigation and banned the use of the baton for mouth searches." Monsieur Loya (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2013humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2013&dlid=220317&anchor=section1#section1 Monsieur Loya (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * If a print publication that breaks stories as significant and well referenced as this (as one example) is deprived of a position inside the world "largest and most-read reference work in history" then we, and I am afraid yourself, are not doing our job as serious curators of the historical record.
 * I fundementally disagree with the sentiments here and hope my point here is taken seriously. Monsieur Loya (talk) 23:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have now added a further citation + quote to the article push home the significance of the case broken by Circus Bazaar Magazine.
 * The United States State Department Norwegian country report on Human Rights practices for 2013 would refer to this case under "Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" stating,
 * "The constitution and law prohibit such practices. In May two Oslo police officers were filmed examining a suspected drug dealer’s mouth and throat with a thin telescoping metal baton. In response to media reports and inquiries from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), the Oslo Police stated that such actions were legal. An earlier assessment by the Police University found the actions to be questionable since health personnel must conduct all bodily searches. The police launched an internal investigation and banned the use of the baton for mouth searches." Monsieur Loya (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2013humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2013&dlid=220317&anchor=section1#section1 Monsieur Loya (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment In reference to the “extortion” referenced above, Monsieur Loya posted links to screenshots of this so-called extortion on their talk page. From the screenshots, the attempted extortion appears to be the work of garden variety scammers/spammers which can be safely ignored.  --Finngall talk  14:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. No good sources about the magazine. The "notoriety" is non-existant. The above defense of the article is all over the place, but contains no relevant points. The single search hit in Norwegian newspaper archives mentions Circus Bazaar in a photo byline. 2A01:799:19A1:C100:750D:97BF:E2DB:90EE (talk) 09:38, 25 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - I strongly oppose the deletion of the Circus Bazaar Magazine Wikipedia article. While it may not be a global household name, the magazine has a dedicated following and is widely available online and in major bookshops in Norway (Norli, Outland). As a subscriber myself, I can attest to its high quality content and unique perspectives being presented. Just because a publication isn't (yet) a mainstream success doesn't mean it shouldn't have a place on Wikipedia. Circus Bazaar deserves to be recognized for its contribution to the cultural landscape, and deleting its article would be a disservice to both the magazine and Wikipedia readers who may be interested in learning more about it.live and let live (talk) 22:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry but that "single search hit" provides only print editions of Norways biggest newspaper "Aftenposten" and is tagging the Magazine based on "yes" that byline to a photo. But what is the article about? And how many times does it mention the magazine, its investigations and a documentary it produced in the article itself?
 * I have linked that very article photographed and in the references above. Maybe you should look.
 * If my defence of this is "all over the place" then I think you should focus on the links in question. Not provide evidence of nothing.
 * As a matter of fact if you search the magazine in the same website you provide which is the National Library of Norway you will actually find the magazine itself. Click here....
 * Many of the major libraries in the country stock the magazine.
 * I do not want to make an accusations directly but given there is a conserted attempt to extort the magazine and this record is publically available I think is prudent to look carefully at these delete votes if they come from IP accounts with little or no edit history. Monsieur Loya (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Additional citiation: https://www.tv2.no/nyheter/innenriks/her-stapper-politiet-to-batonger-i-munnen-pa-mistenkt-narkoselger/6513993/ Monsieur Loya (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Monsieur Loya you can only !vote once so best to strike this additional "keep" (see Help:Cheatsheet). I will also say walls of text are unhelpful along with the extortion claims because you  skewing into personal attacks and  legal threats.  Best to concentrate only on sources that meet WP:THREE and so far what you have provided is unconvincing in that regard.  S0091 (talk) S0091 (talk) 00:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Please point to my other "keep" vote? This is the first and only one. And in regard to extortion. Its a fact - so it needs to be raised. Thank you. Monsieur Loya (talk) 10:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * You have two bolded "Keep"s above. As far as extortion, I suggest reaching out to the Trust and Safety team and leave it with them to handle. S0091 (talk) 20:32, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That is another user. Please retract. Monsieur Loya (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ahh...I see. I missed the signature.  Yes, I will strike that comment.  S0091 (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete I'd like to keep this but most of the article is cited to the journal's own site. All of that needs to come from 3rd party sources, or that content could legitimately be removed from the article. I removed the cites to IMDB and Youtube (those can be in the external links but not as references - they are not considered reference-worthy sources). I took a look at the news articles in the Norwegian papers and they all seemed to be about the same police incident; the role of CB was that it posted the video. Those articles are not about the magazine, and the magazine is only mentioned. So if there are 2-3 actual sources that are about the magazine and that provide the information in the article, then we could keep it. I'll check back. Oh, and some of the Norwegian sources are behind paywalls (e.g. Moss Avis) so I unfortunately can't see if those provide good info. If someone has access it would be great to get a short description of the relevant contents. Lamona (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the polite and thoughtful comment. Also thank you for the edits of the article with the hope of improving it.
 * But please take into consideration that Circus Bazaar Magazine is small but has handled huge cases. It is incorrect to reduce the magazines contribution in this case to having posted a video. It discovered the case and ran a huge investigation. Found the witnesses and built a network of NGOs and government agencies to bring such a thing to public prominance. Which all these citations validate. It also produced a documentary "The Serpent in Paradise" on the issue.
 * The reality is, as I have described above, that Circus Bazaar Magazine is a original media/news creator and quite often other media outlets are of course writing on material they produce rather than writing on the magazine itself. In fact there is an obvious conflict of interest as many of these publications are technically competitors and there is a natural insentive to simply run with a story and "tip the hat" as little as possible to the creator of the the material and facts. Nevertheless, this should be self evident and the very definition of how a small publication gains "noteriety".
 * The noteriety of any such platform - even Wikipedia is not measured on the amount of times a competitor encylopedia makes an indepth bit of writing on it as a company, but by virtue of the articles it produces and its user base. It is exactly the same thing.
 * At what point does a budding print magazine gain such noteriety? When a competitor news and media platform decides to promote them in contraditcion to its own market interests? I am sure that the news/media game does not work in such a way.   Monsieur Loya (talk) 17:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That's a common problem with newspapers and magazines--the bar for notability is the same as for most other subjects, but yes, it's not as likely that other reliable newspapers or magazines will write about a competitor unless they've done something really noteworthy. But that's not a flaw with Wikipedia's standards.  Without verified references, there is no basis for an encyclopedia article on a subject, regardless of the subject. --Finngall <sup style="color: #D4A017;">talk  19:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok I can accept that but then why on earth are these not verified references? There is absolutley nothing wrong with the references. Library reference systems in Norway all show that it is a legitimately published serial publication with formal with ISBN and ISSN numbers. Plus there is a wealth of book stores accross the country selling it and they all have it on their websites for promotional purposes.
 * These are entirely indpendent and unbiased institutiions. Far more so than your average media house.
 * Do these hold weight? Monsieur Loya (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sources serve two purposes: verifiability and notability. There is no doubt the publication exists, sources support that from a verifiability perspective but that is not enough to meet notability. In order to meet the notability guidelines a subject must be written about in-depth by multiple reliable, secondary and independent sources. S0091 (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The two articles from Moss Avis are based on interviews with the owner and editor of Circus Bazaar Magazine Shane Alexande Caldwell, the American Artist R.A. the Rugged Man and Julie Fillion, an SPFX artist associated with the project. They are describing two music video projects the magazine officially produced in during the covid pandemic. These were for the American artists R.A. the Rugged Man, Wu-Tang Clan and Kool G Rap.
 * Quote
 * After studying art history for five years in Tromsø, she came into contact with Shane Alexander Caldwell. He runs the Circus Bazaar Company, and in the middle of the corona pandemic, he got the American star rapper RA The Rugged Man to Moss to record a music video for the song Hate Speech.
 * Julie was given the main responsibility for the costumes and make-up. A big task for a new graduate, but Shane can't praise her enough.
 * - The end result was very good. It was a big project for my small company. We hadn't done so many film assignments before, but it helps when you have such good people as Julie on the team, he says.
 * - It was a lot of work, and it was also in the middle of the corona era. It was intense, and incredibly educational. What I appreciate is that I was given such free rein. Shane lets me use my own style and use the art background I have and I get to express myself creatively, adds Julie.
 * Shane has since also worked with the legendary hip hop group Wu-Tang Clan in New York. Julie Filion was also involved then. The former hopes that he will be able to film more in Moss in the future.
 * Feel free to find R.A. the Rugged Man: Dragon Fire, distributed by Nature Sounds Records on youtube where Circus Bazaar Magazine is the Major production credit on the first shot of the film.
 * Thank you Monsieur Loya (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Monsieur Loya please take the time to read through all the links that have been provided in this discussion. Interviews with those affiliated with the publication are not independent or secondary.  Also, notability is not inherited. I will not comment further because doing so invites unhelpful walls of text.  What is needed is WP:THREE which has yet to be provided.  For the closer of this discussion, this is delete from me. S0091 (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Monsieur Loya (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Monsieur Loya please take the time to read through all the links that have been provided in this discussion. Interviews with those affiliated with the publication are not independent or secondary.  Also, notability is not inherited. I will not comment further because doing so invites unhelpful walls of text.  What is needed is WP:THREE which has yet to be provided.  For the closer of this discussion, this is delete from me. S0091 (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I subscribe to the magazine, is this really not relevant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4647:5204:0:C86E:F762:6326:30BC (talk) 12:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.