Talk:Circus Vargas

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Circus High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Circus. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.CircusWikipedia:WikiProject CircusTemplate:WikiProject CircusCircus
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:

[[Kidsongs#Kidsongs A Day at the Circus (1987)|Kidsongs "A Day at the Circus"]] The anchor (Kidsongs A Day at the Circus (1987)) has been deleted.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

Ownership dispute

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Heads up, there appear to be a spat over ownership.

An IP address removed a variety of info, that was later reverted, including the purported ownership: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circus_Vargas&diff=1190865446&oldid=1190639063

An account claiming to be the circus itself has deleted all reference as outdated -- quite possible -- but also "misinformation," which they don't explain. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circus_Vargas&diff=prev&oldid=1191045534

At present, the alleged, now former ownership is not mentioned in the article. I can find references as early as this extensive 2016 interview with the owners' daughter, and as recent as September, when the ownership was detailed beyond what we had in the article (specifically that they took ownership in 2005), so we're not making a circular reference. -- Zanimum (talk) 13:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

These edits have continued. I urge the editors looking to change from sourced information to come to this Talk page and explain the concerns, as well as provide sources where possible. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic