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. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Suite Life On Water[edit]

If this is real it's pure WP:CRYSTAL. No information on production, no information on episodes. Key words "supposed to" and "unknown." I'm thinking it's probable WP:HOAX, however, considering there are zero Ghits. Redfarmer (talk) 11:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Redfarmer pretty much summed up what I put on my prod. Also, the history suggests you actually removed my prod when adding the AfD, rather than us both addding at the same time (see diff) but whatever, as long as this is deleted. J Milburn (talk) 11:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It was one of those strange instances with Twinkle where Twinkle freaked out because it apparently tried to edit the page at the exact time as you proded it. Twinkle can be a pain sometimes when it's not helpful. Redfarmer (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Bláthnaid 12:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:V at the very least.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 13:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - utterly unsourced; violates WP:CRYSTAL; no doubt mainly original research.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Porcupine. Jonathan 17:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Some backing that there was a sequel possibly piloted or planned for The Suite Life of Zach and Cody and there are some references in that article that supports that possibility. However, the references are fan-sites and forum comments on that fan-site and some original research based on a net name registration, not this article. As there is nothing but fannish hoping and speculation about a sequel and even less about what the actual name would be, there is nothing that backs this particular article.--NrDg 22:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Check on TV.com and Google it, it's real. FAGGOTS! Da bomba3 (talk) 03:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment as per Matt Webb Mitovich (February 4, 2008). "Zack & Cody Spin-off Is Afloat — Minus Tisdale". TV Guide. Retrieved 2008-02-04. the title of the planned spin-off is NOT the title of the AfD article.--NrDg 03:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, so maybe it is real- is it notable and verifiable? Is what is said in the article backed up by reliable sources, or is it original research? This series may not get past the pilot stage. And why the personal attack? J Milburn (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - The TV Guide blog entry is the only thing I have seen from a WP:RS. It is not enough to base an article on although it could be a source of information. The TV Guide article does NOT back up a series called The Suite Life On Water. I would like to see a Disney press release announcing a new series before we even consider an article on it. It is possible the series won't be picked up and we do not need articles about TV shows that never got broadcast.--NrDg 15:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Move~~ Reuters http://www.reuters.com/article/televisionNews/idUSN0446611820080204 has reported on this with sufficient detail to potentially justify an article The Suite Life on Deck. --NrDg 17:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The Suite Life on Deck article has been created with with 2 good references showing WP:N. There is nothing in this article that is useful that needs to be merged. No need for a redirect either as this name is bogus.--NrDg 23:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job to you and the other involved editor. I guess this is notable now, regardless of whether it is properly commissioned- however, if the show doesn't go ahead in the end, a merge back into the main article about the show may be appropriate. J Milburn (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Terminate. The real spinoff article already exists. Title is phony enough to not even serve as a redirect. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 02:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.