Talk:The Next Step (Canadian TV series)

Cast

I see that someone added Casandra Lim as part of the starring cast. There is no evidence that Casandra Lim is part of the cast. I have also added evidence that Zac Vran and Taveeta Szymanowicz are part of the season two cast. Please add evidence that Casandra Lim IS PART of the cast. Thank you. CanadianDude1 (talk) 17:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't see Casandra Lim listed as part of the cast on imbd. Has evidence been added yet? Spacegeek31 (talk) 04:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Made note that all episodes are available to hulu subscribers.

I noticed that on Hulu, they only are offering the first two episodes free, made a note that all 30 episodes are available to hulu plus subscribers. Spacegeek31 (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

The Next Step shown on other channels

The article says Disney Channel Australia and Disney Channel New Zealand are the only channels that aired The Next Step but actually series 1 has already been aired on CBBC and series 1.5 is currently being aired.

85.210.93.180 (talk) 15:38, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: Just realise it does mention CBBC broadcasting it but this makes the previous sentence (that only Disney channels had shown it) incorrect.

85.210.93.180 (talk) 15:41, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

It also plays on TRTE in Ireland Jessbn (talk) 15:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Awards and Nominations

I'll leave this new item to be added by someone who knows their way properly around the article, I don't want to mess up the formatting. BAFTA Kids' Vote - Television 2015, Winner. See British Academy Children's Awards. Narky Blert (talk) 19:13, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 21 September 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move - There is a consensus to move both, based foremost on recognizability FOARP (talk) 14:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

---

• The Next Step (2013 TV series) → The Next Step (Canadian TV series)
• The Next Step (1991 TV series) → The Next Step (American TV program)

– It is preferred under WP:NCTV that TV series in the current situation as these two be moved to "by country" disambiguation to better differentiate the two TV series from each other (e.g. see the similar move request for the Canadian TV series Backstage). In addition, the American The Next Step is a "TV program" under WP:NCTV, not a "TV series" (with continuing story elements), and so should also be moved to "TV program" disambiguation. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Havelock Jones (talk) 13:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose - country disambiguation is best used when there are localized versions within the same franchise. These two series are unrelated, and the best way to differentiate them is by the year. Redirects can be created for the proposed country-based titles to aid searching. There is not enough material in the 1991 series article to determine the "series" vs "program" question right now. -- Netoholic @ 00:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
  • You are literally the only editor who feels this way. Consensus overrules your interpretation. And WP:NCTV does actually say that "by country" disambig is preferred – that's a fact. There's no reason to deviate from this in this case. And then there's the fact that you are completely ignoring the rationale on the second one, which should certainly be disambiguated by "program" and not "series". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
    • @IJBall: - WP:NCTV#Additional disambiguation states that year disambiguation be "[g]enerally used when there are shows with the same title within the same country". Since BOTH shows have aired in the U.S., per the guideline, we must use year disambiguation. -- Netoholic @ 20:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
      • That's not what that means, and you know it – that is about TV show "country of origin", not "where a TV show might have been broadcast some time"! If the latter was the meaning, we would never even use "by country" disambiguation in any case, and even you don't advocate that!!... Come on – The Next Step (Canadian TV show) barely was broadcast in the U.S. (and it's set in Toronto!), and the American TV program was almost certainly never aired in Canada. There is almost no chance of confusion on this. This really is a specious oppose rationale. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:37, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
        • @IJBall: In the 90s, the Discovery channel aired almost identical content across both the US and Canada - and that is the case for this show (https://www.newspapers.com/clip/85802701/). I've found TV listings in Canadian newspapers across the country for the entire Discovery run of this show. You can verify this with this search on Newspapers.com . -- Netoholic @ 20:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

• Support – I view disambiguating by year as a second resort if we cannot do it by country. In this case, we can. Series don't have to be "related" to be disambiguated by country, and that shouldn't even be an issue here since one is proposed as a series and the other as a program. – DarkGlow • 09:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

  @DarkGlow: The main reason to avoid country disambiguation is because many shows are aired in multiple countries (especially via modern streaming platforms) - that is the case with The Next Step (2013 TV series)#Broadcast and reception which aired in Canada, US, UK, and Australia. Someone looking for this program using the current titles will know its not a 1990s show, whereas they may not recognize it being produced in Canada. -- Netoholic @ 10:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

A specious argument, as the redirects by year will still exist. But organizing TV shows by country is the primary way we do it, and it makes by far the most sense, as most people can recognize national origin a lot more readily that they can come up with a TV series' "premiere year" (how will they necessarily know it's "not a 1990s show"?!). DarkGlow's argument is by far the prevailing view. Again, as the Backstage discussion and dozens of others RM discussions have shown, nearly everyone prefers "by country" disambiguation as the primary disambiguation method in NCTV. So I fail to understand why you keep trying to gum up the works on these requests, when you are the only one who opposes this, and have been overruled on multiple occasions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@IJBall: You know full well there is no "primary way we do it" - both methods are acceptable. What matters is how best a particular set of same-named articles can be handled to provide maximum clarity to readers and editors. Your citation of the Backstage discussion is specious - a 3-year-old discussion with 3 participants cannot set wide-ranging precedent. -- Netoholic @ 20:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

You insist upon ignoring that multiple RMs over years have affirmed the preference for "by country" disambiguation – it's not "one discussion", it's over a dozen (and likely at least two dozen) with multiple different editors participating. There is a reason why WP:NCTV's wording was changed to "Prefix the singular country of broadcast (adjective)... Generally the preferred disambiguation when additional disambiguation is needed." – you were literally the only one out of many editors who opposed this. It is clear – DarkGlow's viewpoint (which is also mine, and other editors' as well) is the consensus view of NCTV, as affirmed by multiple (multiple) RMs over the years: of the two, "by country" disambiguation is acknowledged to be the more WP:RECOGNIZABLE disambiguation method over "by year" disambiguation, and we generally only do "by year" disambiguation when "by country" disambiguation isn't possible. That is not the case here – "by country" disambiguation is easily possible in this case. And it's preferable. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@IJBall: First of all, constantly implying I am alone in a particular view is incredibly bad faith and untrue. Second, very few RMs of this sort can truly be precedent because every scenario is different based on how many articles we're talking about, where they aired, when they aired, etc. In THIS case we're talking about, both shows aired in the U.S., so you are intentionally introducing more ambiguity in the situation than by retaining the years. They aired in the same country, but were separated by over 22 years... that makes year disambiguation ideal in this very case. -- Netoholic @ 20:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not going to belabor this, but, yeah, uh, no, it doesn't – "by country" is still preferable in this case. As it is in nearly every case where it can be easily applied. And, again, the Canadian TV series barely aired in the U.S. – it is largely unknown here, and is unlikely to be confused with a TV show about technology that originated in San Francisco. But "by country" under WP:NCTV isn't about "where shows aired or were released" in any case, and never has been – it has always been about country of origin, just like it is with films. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

What we have here is a 1991 US-originating show that also aired in Canada, and a 2013 Canada-originating show that also aired in the US. This is a terrible case for country disambiguation, but a great case for use of year. -- Netoholic @ 21:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. There were quite a few RMs on this (year vs country) with the results in favor of country. I agree that the country is the most recognizable element. Gonnym (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. Both types of disambiguation are perfectly acceptable in cases like this. In situations such as this one, where the two series in question aired decades apart, disambiguation by year seems to make more sense than using the country. -- Calidum 13:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

FYI, I've started a related discussion on this topic at WT:NCTV. My concern is that there was no consensus to change the guideline to give preference to DABing by country and it should be reverted. -- Calidum 13:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Strongly Oppose - as someone else mentioned, the country disambiguation is usually only necessary for related shows, such as when U.S has their own version of Shameless or The Office based on the original UK versions. Also, The Next Step, on the other hand, is hardly country-specific, and even though it's originally Canadian, other countries have been playing a far more dominant role in the production and distribution of the series. It even airs in UK before Canada, as of the last 2 seasons or so.— Starforce¹³ 14:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • That has never been how either film or television has been disambiguated – it has always been about "country of origin" not "country of broadcast or release". If the latter was a concern, then we should just completely eliminate "by country" disambig to eliminate any possible ambiguity, and no one has ever made that argument, not even Netoholic. And, no, the "by country diambig should only be used for "related" shows" has been effectively rejected time and again in multiple RMs. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
    • @IJBall: Are we even reading the same guidline? Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(television)#Additional_disambiguation has for many, many years said "Prefix the singular country of broadcast". -- Netoholic @ 17:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Imprecise wording there – again, if we define this in terms of where a TV show has been "broadcast", then we will simply have to eliminate all "by country" disambig, because most U.S. show have tended to be "broadcast" everywhere (eventually). But that is not what the guideline means – it means "country of origin", i.e. where it was produced, and where it was originally intended to be broadcast (i.e. first, but even that is not "absolute", as, for example, some clearly U.S. shows have be "broadcast" in other countries first). If you have more precise wording for that, I would support a change. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

if we define this in terms of where a TV show has been "broadcast", then we will simply have to eliminate all "by country" disambig, because most U.S. show have tended to be "broadcast" everywhere (eventually). - this to me seems to be the most importance point of this discussion. People outside of N. America and the UK need to understand that shows get broadcast there also, sometimes even on the same day. That still does not make it <insert local country> series. So we either accept that shows are always seen in other countries and continue to disambiguate with the country name (like we've always done) or say that country name is the worst option ever and eliminate it. But the current situation we are at, having this same discussion, over and over again, nitpicking over "Would x editor confuse a US series for a Canadian series" is very tiresome. Gonnym (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

And, FTR, WP:FILM doesn't interpret it this way either – plenty of American films premiere at, say, Cannes: that doesn't suddenly make them "French films". Or Marvel films being massively popular in China doesn't make them "Chinese films". Etc. I'm truly puzzled that someone is actually trying to make this "broadcast" argument, because no one in WP:TV has ever interpreted it that way. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Both types of disambiguation are not "perfectly acceptable" – we have WP:RECOGNIZABLE for a reason. As an non-expert on the issue, I can immediately infer my desired target from the country disambiguation, but hardly so in disambiguation by year. I don't see a policy-based reason (nor a consensus-based one) for the "only for related shows" approach. No such user (talk) 12:13, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

So you can immediately tell the difference between a Canadian and American TV show, even though one of them streamed in several countries, including the US? -- Calidum 17:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Not immediately, but from reading the articles I found out that both shows were recorded and originally broadcast only in one country so there is no ambiguity. I don't think subsequent streaming or broadcasting counts. For example, Mayday (Canadian TV series) was also broadcast on Discovery Channel in my European country (and in dozens of others) since mid-2010s; I immediately learned it was Canadian from its closing credits. I would hardly be convinced to support moving it to Mayday (2003 TV series) to distinguish it from Mayday (2013 TV series), since I have no idea when the first season was recorded. No such user (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

This is actually a really good point – checking the end credits of this The Next Step (ep. #3.30), and one clearly finds "With the assistance of" Canada film and tax credit, and Ontario tax credit, in the end credits, along with Writers Guild of Canada, Directors Guild of Canada, etc., and nothing in the end-credits to indicate U.S. participation – there is no ambiguity from the credits that this is a Canadian TV series. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Because no American TV series are shot primarily in Canada, right? 21 Jump Street happens to be my favorite Canadian series. The Good Doctor is right up there too. -- Calidum 15:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm at work, so I can't easily verify this right now, but American shows filmed in Canada still tend to have American writers (i.e. the "writers room still tends to be in L.A. or NYC, even if a show is filmed in Vancouver or Toronto); they often tend to have U.S. directors as well. IOW, the credits would clearly indicate both countries in those cases, while the production cards at the end will usually make the actual country of origin clear. But The Next Step has zero indication of U.S. involvement in its end credits – all Canadian writers and producers, and the production card is "Family Channel" which is a Canadian cable company (and thus a Canadian production). While the show was "distributed" by the BBC, it was only distributed, not produced, by them, so it is not a "Canada-UK" co-production either. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

"Country of origin" has nothing to do with WP:NCTV#Additional disambiguation, which refers only to country of broadcast, so this whole argument is baseless. -- Netoholic @ 17:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

No, you are confused by what is meant by this. Try making your argument in WP:TV – "country of origin" is where it was produced (i.e. "paid for") and where it was originally intended to be broadcast (i.e. both, but probably even more the former than the latter). Again, if we go with your interpretation, "by country" disambiguation will have to go entirely, as many TV shows are broadcast everywhere, and sometimes do not even "premiere" in the country of origin. If we go this route, "country" will become meaningless for disambiguation purposes. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I am quite clear as to the intent and wording of the current guideline. It is you that needs to make a convincing argument to alter it to your prefered "interpretation". -- Netoholic @ 17:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

And we're back to "this is Netoholic's guideline, and only Netoholic's interpretation is valid". That took longer than usual. Problem is: 1) plenty of people do not share your interpretation, and 2) circumstances change, and with the advent of streaming TV, even using a term like "broadcast" is increasingly problematic and possibly even anachronistic now, so it's very likely that NCTV should be updated in its wording in any case... Bottom line: If you think "by country" disambig should be mostly eliminated, and NCTV should simply follow the lead of WP:NCFILM, then please make that argument, so we stop talking in circles. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

The guideline literally uses the word "broadcast" and not the word "origin", so its not even up to my interpretation. This is a case of you pushing -your- interpretation (really a preference, since the word "broadcast" really can't be interpreted any other way) ahead of the actual, literal, clear wording of the guideline. Stop projecting. -- Netoholic @ 18:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

(Re 21 Jump Street) Hard cases make bad law. There certainly exist programs where the country of origin is ambiguous (although I don't see it in 21 Jump Street, which seems to be an American production that was only shot in Canada), and in such cases we should resort to an alternative disambiguation scheme. For me, it's all about recognizability: the point of all disambiguation is to ensure that readers find their desired article quickly. Consistency is a nice bonus but not mandatory. No such user (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note to closer: please wait for the outcome of the discussion this discussion before closing.VR _talk 02:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support. The number one purpose of a disambiguator is to be recognizable. As a person who frequently has to link to The Next Step in related articles such as the Canadian Screen Awards, but is far too old to be watching Family Channel stuff and thus has no personal memory of what year it first debuted in, I have to take the superfluous step of opening a second window solely to look for its article in order to remind myself what year it's dabbed at every time the matter of having to link it comes up — and that's not a reasonable burden to place on editors.
  There are clearly times when disambiguation by year is warranted, I'm not denying that — such as if a country has had multiple different series with the same name so country-dabbing doesn't work — but I don't see a compelling reason why year-dabbing should be the preferred default with country-dabbing relegated to the exception. People are much more likely to know what country a series they're looking for an article about came from than they are to instinctively know what year it debuted in, and the articles should be dabbed accordingly. Bearcat (talk) 14:54, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support - Bearcat makes a compelling argument for this case. I agree that country of origin in cases such as this is much more identifying than year of origin to people looking for information about the shows. Bottom line is, what is most useful for readers should be guiding us the most. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:08, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Locations and Trivia

I added locations clearly from the show, found with a bit of research. If you google map search, "Southside Johnnys" you are able to see the same shop as in many episodes including S1 E11:Can You Keep a Secret? and S1 E24: Price Tag. Going down the same street, the hair salon is the same as seen in S1 E10: Road to Joy, meaning that the dental lab next door is Sal's Costume Wearhouse. The triva is all directly from the mouths of Brennan Clost (Daniel S1-4) and Brittany Raymond (Riley S1-5) on their YouTube channel. I am not able to source this as they are specific sections of YouTube videos, but I hope someone will be able to take the time to review this in a bit more depth as I have for over a year to make sure this can be added. Thank you so much for the time and effort to make this TNS page perfect for all fans! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CJ337 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

The problem is your research is WP:original research and as such is not permitted by Wikipedia policy. All information in articles must be directly supported by reliable sources and stated in a clear and ambiguous manner such that no interpretation is required to understand how the information is supported. YouTube videos from verified sources that meet reliable source requirements can be used as reverences - see {{Cite AV media}}. However also see WP:TRIVIA and avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

What is being added is absolutely WP:TRIVIA, in addition to being unsourced. Some of the info about the pilot, like Logan Fabbro originally being cast as Emily, or the info about Clost leaving the show to actually attend Julliard, would be noteworthy enough to be added to the article, under 'Production/Casting', if it can be reliably sourced (and, no – WP:YOUTUBE videos do not count). But most of the rest of it, even if sourced, is merely WP:TRIVIA, and not noteworthy enough to merit inclusion in the article, even if sourced. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the help in the articles. I appreciate it. If move the information about Fabbro and Clost to casting, change the title of Trivia to Miscellaneous and find more reliable sources, would that solve the problems. I am wondering how to find more reliable information than directly from the actors themselves. Can I have some help on how to do this if I can't cite YouTube? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by CJ337 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Please note that this article makes no mention of The Next Step at all, and so can not be used to source the claim that Clost's being accepted to Julliard is why he left the show. Meanwhile, fan sites and blogs cannot be used as sources as per WP:USERGENERATED. YouTube videos should be avoided in all but exceptional cases. And casting info belongs in a 'Production' and/or 'Casting' section. We don't do 'Trivia' or 'Miscellaneous' sections in an encyclopedia. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)