Talk:List of The Suite Life of Zack & Cody episodes

Sure

im pretty sure the 1st episode of The Suite Life on Deck is the last episode of this series Cruz Perea 21:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Unnecessary?

I do think it is necessary to have separate pages for every episodes for not only this but others shows such as Zoey 101 and Ned's Declassified school Survival guide . It is useful and i enjoy reading it User:Avi charizard

I searched for Zack and cody episodes on the search page and saw there were a lot of links for episodes but except 'Risk it all" all led to this page. can we have separate pages for episodes? And can this be a part of Project disney

I think that having a separate page for each individual episode is a bit excessive. I havent seen any other one show have as many subpages as this one. Is there anyway we could streamline this?--Jonthecheet 05:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

It is necessary to put descriptions and information on a separate page for every episode, most people agree with me who are regular WIkipedia users.(Adityamanutd)

The Simpsons, Family Guy, and South Park have two or even three times more subpages as The Zack and Cody page does. The main reason each episode gets it own page is so it can get a detailed episode description instead of one or two sentences. Any of the above shows does the same thing. Tazz765 15:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

So do most of the episodes of each Star Trek series.24.208.96.72 22:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I can name at least 10 shows that have individual articles for each episode Malevious 02:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't work by precedent, though. The point is that these are non-notable, not even making claims to significance. As discussed at WP:AN/I, rather than speedily deleting them (or even taking them to AfD), I've made them redirects. This is being done, slowly, in all similar cases. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Except you can't just go ahead and ignore all rules like that. What you're doing requires serious consensus. The ani discussion was never finished. 2 editors said go ahead and redirect while others said no. You need to get an official guideline for this passed. This is an extremely controversial matter as it affects many articles. As well that discussion was only about TSR, which was completely out of place in the first place as none of the TSR editors were even informed about the discussion it appears. If you can get consensus on this I will gladly help you re add the redirects as well as apologize for causing you trouble, but until then we need consensus. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 00:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Which admins said "no"?

The series is insignificant in itself; there is no conceivable argument for the claim that the episodes are significant enough to need separate articles (some of which are longer than articles on significant topics in the arts and sciences). This is part of the fanzine area of Wikipedia that goes against notability (and very often against other policies and guidelines); it needs to be cleaned up — it's part of what makes Wikipedia a laughing stock (as a colleague said the other day, when he found that I edited here: "It's not very reliable of thorough on the important issues, but I suppose that if you want to know the minutiae of some fantasy show, it's the place to look". Fans of these minor children's series can surely find som more suitable place to talk at length about each episode; how about starting a separate Wiki? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I see your point but you still need consensus. This in effect starts a brand new precedent. Please don't undo the reverts until this discussion is over or else it turns into an edit war. If you want these redirected you need to get a policy passed to deal with this or else editors will just keep undoing this and you will prob lose all function in your wrists from reverting. I think you need to make up an official policy and see how many other editors and admins like it, because this not only affects the disney articles but every single tv show on here. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

You two are verging on an edit war, if not actually participating in one. Either start a concensus, or just stop editing. Don't keep reverting each other's changes behind each other's backs. Perhaps intervention is needed? Whiskey in the Jar 15:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

New Episode Pages

Can we hold off creating individual pages for episodes until they have confirmed airdates? When one episodes order is moved I have to rearrange all the individual pages which is a pain. It would make it much easier if we hold off creating pages so far in advance. Plus, I believe Wikipedia's official policy is only a month in advance of a confirmed airdate. Tazz765 00:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Just letting you know of a changed confirmed airdate on Loosely Ballrom to September 22, 2006, as per commercial aired tonight during Volley Dad. 03:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Do Not Make a Description for each Episode

Since there are a individual page for each episode, DO NOT MAKE DESCRIPTIONS ON THIS PAGE Candyo32 20:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

This page is following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Television episodes guidlines. Please don't delete the table without first gaining some sort of consensus. - Peregrinefisher 23:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

First, somebody deleted all the episodes for That's So Raven, and now this. Whoever keeps doing this had better stop! ---- DanTD 13:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

To Do

• We should proably include more detailed summaries since the images create rooms for 2-3 lines of text (at 1024x768 resolution).
• 10 more screenshots to catch up to the current episode.
• There's a slight problem with season 2's table in the top right of that I just can't figure out how to fix.
• Try to get scripts for some more episodes. I added one for "dads back" but more would be awesome
• We need a longer summary for Ahh Wilderness, and Christmas at the tipton

  WE should get separate episode pages

Anybody have any screenshots of Ashley Tisdale & Brenda Song jumping up and down in the Tipton Lobby in Not So Suite 16? Or should we just swipe it from another site and give them credit for the picture? DanTD 13:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

No, but i think i can get it gimmie like a day or 2 and ill see if i can get it. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 13:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• WE NEED SEPARATE EPISOdE PAGES. PLEASE
• On the main Suite Life of Zack and Cody Page there is a table just like the character appearences table on this page yet they DO NOT MATCH!!

Instructions in article

The following instructions were in bold at the top of the article. I'm revomed them, since they're not part of the encyclopedia itself:

“ The Suite Life of Zack & Cody has been renewed for a third season. This was officially confirmed by Disney, however the cast will remain on break for several more months. DO NOT post any Season 3 episodes until filming resumes. ”

-- SilverStar_talk 03:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

questions

• How do you know when the episodes air on tv and the episode informmation before it goes on tv? User:Shirleybiscuit
• Why do we have less screenshots than before

To answer your first question, episode air dates are posted through reliable sources, such as www.TV.com, and then posted here on Wikipedia. To answer your second question, all screenshots must be legal. If they are not, they are removed ASAP. Switchfo0t813 18:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

New images that are going to be deleted

User TSLcrazier has been replacing images in the list with images that they have uploaded. The problem is they have not performed any of the correct fair use and copyright steps to ensure that their images are not deleted. I think in the next few weeks we'll have to replace the images so I'm starting a list of images to re-add. Please add any I miss.

• Image:The Suite Life of Zack and Cody s01e09.png
• Image:The Suite Life of Zack and Cody s01e17.png

Peregrinefisher 08:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

How do you know about new episodes of the suite life of zack and cody before it air on tv?Shirleybiscuit

They have the article on TV.com Teeple12 21:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Switched

I switched Helath and Fitness and Risk it All due to the airdates to make them in order. Is this ok???? Teeple12 21:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Change ordering to production code??

The "The Suite Life Really Big Weekend" that Disney Channel is doing today and tomorrow is airing all the shows (from what I can tell) in their production code order, not their original airdate order. At least one other Disney Channel show (Kim Possible) has its episode list in production code order, so what do people think about changing this one to be the same?? --SSTwinrova 05:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Images

The person who removed the images said they are copy vios. They should read up on the Images in lists discussion, becuase the problem is has nothing to do with copy vios. It's about the number of unfree images and wikipedia's desire to be commecially reusable. There is no consensus that these lists are a bad things for wikipedia. If you think an image doesn't mathch a summary, fix the summary or reomove that individual image. Do not remove all the images. Most match their summaries well. - Peregrine Fisher 20:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I've started adding back the images with improved summaries that provide critical commentary on the episode. The admin notice board stuff has changed nothing at this point, wait for the official announcement before using it as a reason to remove the images from this page. - Peregrine Fisher 19:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I just uploaded another image for Not So Suite 16, only to find an image was finally added. Image:Maddie & London's Suite 16.jpg. I admit I swiped it from a Brenda Song fansite and gave them credit for the pic(after all, it is theirs). ---- DanTD 16:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

3 eps up for deletion

3 of the episodes that are supposedly from season 3 ar e up for deletion at afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graduation (The Suite Life of Zack and Cody episode). --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 21:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Please help improve summaries

To justify having images on this page, we need summaries that are not too short and match the images subject. I've only seen the first 15 episodes, so if someone who has seen the other episodes could help me, I would appreciate it. - Peregrine Fisher 20:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

going nine?

i heard that they might make nine seasons does anyone know more????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.159.44.114 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 18 March 2007

no one knows, but i doubt it will goto nine seasons. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

someone said that the third season would be the last but its uncomfirmed

the 3rd season is the last and has been confirmed by DC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.144.24 (talk) 23:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Images 2

Please stop replacing existing images on the page. If you have an image for and episode and would like to add it to the article, please post here stating why it is better than the current image. We need to focus on adding images for the episodes that don't already have one. We don't need multiple images for episodes. As well, if you upload and image, please make sure it has the correct copyright information as well as a fair-use rational. If it doesn't it will be removed immediately. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

!

whats wrong with the screenshots? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.148.232 (talk)

Removed per policy. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 18:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Concerning deletion of episode pages…

If you think your deletion of the episode pages (which still exist for Zoey 101 and most likely several other associated shows) is justified , then could you at least list episodes' guest stars (such as Sammi Hanratty and Eric Lutes on Have a Nice Trip) and have screenshots in their 'boxes'? Hallpriest9(Talk|Archive) 03:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make that list then go ahead. -- Ned Scott 03:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I still see no justification for it. In fact, it's really starting to piss me off!! ---- DanTD 03:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:EPISODE. -- Ned Scott 03:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I still don't see anything wrong. It's like NOBODY can write an article about a TV episode at all!! ---- DanTD 03:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I can think of a few reasons off the top of my head for why people want them gone, no info beyond plot and cast/crew and a little trivia, no sources beyond primary (the episode itself) and some believing they aren't notable. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Where is there "no info beyond plot and cast/crew" in TSL "Not So Suite 16?!" If you ask me, this whole criteria is both subjective, and selective. I was never a fan of shows like Small Wonder or What a Dummy, but I'm not going to run around deleting episodes from those shows just because I think they sucked beef jerkeys. ---- DanTD 03:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

We really need back episode pages , Why in the world is it gone, it is really annoying.

Episodes

Last I checked "GRADUATION" was an episode. Look at disney channel's website in the schedule, click on suite life, click on other episodes, scroll down to about 25 episodes down, and there you have it, the episode is listed to air on June 23, 2007! SO DONT DELETE THE EPISODE ANYMORE! Yankeesrj12 11:27 4 June 2007

Episodes again

I think we should have a separate page for every episode. Everybody will want to look for the plot and even guest stars. I also think there is no harm in having a separate page.I for one am big fan of the show and love to see information for episodes which i have seen and even the ones which i haven't seen.I also Drake and JOsh, Zoey101, Ned's Declassified School survival guide have info on many episodes which you can read information and many which you cant see.I think we should not have some episodes with information and some without.I and many of my friends who visit wikipedia want information for The Suite Life of Zack and Cody and some other shows. Please take my suggestion seriously and stop redirecting. Thank You. Adityamanutd 15:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I strongly agree that these episode pages should exist. There is obviously no consensus for redirecting them all here; it was a decision made by only one person, User:Ned Scott. I hesitate to revert them back because I am concerned about the possibility of a revert war, but it is unacceptable for one person to impose his will like this. Everyking 04:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Even if you bring them back, they'll be put under episode review and tossed back into redirects. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 17:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

If there's so much support for redirecting these articles, where is it? It certainly isn't evident on this talk page, and in the AfD there was a large majority in favor of keeping them. Why not submit this to an episode review and we can use that to decide the issue? Everyking 18:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to bring it up here, Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Episode coverage/Articles for review since action was taken without a discussion, they can be brought back until a discussion has taken place. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 18:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a good suggestion, as one (actually a second review) is ongoing for Hannah Montana. WAVY 10 23:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Review ended. Same result, only though a few episodes did get spared. WAVY 10 19:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Please, no one bring these back. They would not survive a review as they are not notable. --Jack Merridew 15:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

ENOUGH!!!! There was nothing wrong with articles for each episodes and there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with them being brought back... What's the point in deleting them anyway if people liked them.. Is it just so we can get mad at wikipedia and the mods or whatever that go and be smart alecks and know it alls? Whatother reason for deletion is there??? 7/31/07 Z-D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.73.18 (talk • contribs) [diff]

see WP:EPISODE vs WP:ILIKEIT --Jack Merridew 09:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)]

Personally, I've never believed that. However, since Kim Possible episodes are now facing the same threat of redirection, somebody offered the opportunity to transwiki them onto the Annex until such time someone offers a Zack & Cody Wiki of some sort(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Kim_Possible_episodes#Episode_notability). ----DanTD 13:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed The Suite Life Goes Hollywood has been redirected. Since that episode WAS sourced, I have no idea why that one was redirected. WAVY 10 Fan 19:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The sources do not provide anything to assert notability (one didn't even work). We go with quality over quantity; just having them doesn't cut it. TTN 19:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The people making these decisions don't think and don't care whether an epsiode article is notable or has reliable sources or not. I thought for a moment there would be hope in saving these articles, until I found out that all Family Guy episodes have been tagged for deletion. Not redirection, but deletion!! ----DanTD 19:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What I remember everyone involved arguing for when the whole episode AfD took place was that everyone was upset that the episodes were unsourced as well. Providing sources, one would think, would at least help establish notability for a particular episode of a series. WAVY 10 Fan 19:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

As I said, it is about quality, not quantity. If the sources do not actually provide anything, it is as if they aren't even there. TTN 19:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

But NOTHING is considered reliable to you. Not official sources, fansites, general entertainment sites, or anything else. Tale all those away, and you've got NOTHING!! And yet you wonder why we all complain when you do things like this. ----DanTD 19:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Rock Squared Reunion

Please tell me that's not fancruft. WAVY 10 13:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

What happened?

What happened to the other seasons' sections? Deoxys911 03:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Another idiot IP vandal. This is why only people with accounts should be able to edit... --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 03:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Suite Life of Zack and Cody for how long?

Does anyone know how long Suite Life will run? are they going all the way to college then ending it? My personal view is that Disney is in it till college because you can't just stop it in the middle of High School. Will they go all the way to college or will ratings decide it and if they don't get high ratings on it they pull the plug like Boy Meets World did and make up some story that everyone is leaving somewhere? Please Answer. P.S. Every needs to lay off the episode pages should the be seperate or deleted just drop it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.202.103.39 (talk) 22:14, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

This is the last season as there will be a spinoff about Arwin --14:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylan Damien (talk • contribs)

The Arwin spinoff was shelved. A new spinoff with the boys is in development. Suite Life has pretty much run its course and some actors will be moving on, contracts expiring, etc. Season 3 will have 22 episodes.

Benchwarmers is the name of the last episode *sob* —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanna51 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Maddie

Where is Maddie? In last night's episode, First Day of High School, wouldn't Maddie be there? It made sense that she wasn't in a few episodes during the summer vacation because she was at sleep away camp, but if school's starting, shouldn't she be back? --24.186.246.59 at 1:35 PM on 8/27/07.

According to London, Maddie is spending a semester with her Aunt Arctica.--Robors 19:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Which was what she thought Maddie said when she really said 'Antarctica.' The Matyr (^{converse with the Matyr}) 23:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ashley was busy with the HSM tour, HSM2, and working on her album during the filming of season 3. She will only appear in 8 or 9 episodes in season 3. Those episodes recently added, Welcome Back, Crushes and Candies, Sugar Rush Dentist, and I Don't Look Like...Florida, are bogus. Someone should delete them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanna51 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

LAST EPISODE :(

the last episode will be titled as "Doin' Time in Suite 2330", where zack and cody compete to get hte best guest for London's online chat show. Ashley Tisdale will be in it, along with all the Tipton employees. Chris Brown and the Cheetah Girls stayed at the Tipton in the episode. SOURCE: DISNEY ADVENTURE, OCTOBER 2007, page 36-37 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.186.33 (talk) 23:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Please view the source on the episode page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.6.2 (talk) 02:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

sooo sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.144.24 (talk) 23:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

the episode's not airing in June, either —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.40.161.138 (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

no it's not the last episode Gary0203 (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Goof

The S3 notes mentions an ep. that isn't even in the S3 LIST!!!!!SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 18:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Characters for Benchwarmers

This link shows pics. from quite a few S3 (and few S2) eps. Some of which are yet to air but will help show that these characters will appear again.

Agnes, Haley, Barbera, Janice, Jessica, Nia, Leslie, and (POSSIBLY) Max all appear in Benchwarmers. Nia and Agnes aren't listed as appearing in that ep. so please add them.

http://www.studioteacher.com/html/suitelife.htm

The pics. come from a woman who works on the series.SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I see that this link also proves that "Let Us Entertain You" exists as an yet to be aired episode, despite the efforts of those who have deleted it. ----DanTD (talk) 12:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The confirmed airdate for "Benchwarmers" is July 19 -- and it's not part of any "Night of Premieres" either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.18.99 (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Then why didn't Agnes and Max appear??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.201.199 (talk) 00:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The S.S. Tipton

In TV Guide.com it says that there are a total of 89 episodes so that means that there are 7 episodes remaining to be aired in the US. Confirmed episodes are Benchwarmers, Doin' Time in Suite 2330 and The S.S. Tipton. I don't know about Mr. Tipton Comes to Town and Misbehaving Concert. It says that in UK, the episode "Misbehaving Concert" is going to be aired on August 1. I don't know about "Mr. Tipton Comes to Town" but I think its from TV Rage.com. Also, I think the episode "The S.S. Tipton" is only a 30-minute episode since in YouTube its only about 20 minutes. Can anyone confirm that the episode Misbehaving Concert, Mr. Tipton Comes to Town is an episode. Also, can anyone confirm if "The S.S. Tipton" is 1 hour long or 30 minutes long. Thank You! --Gary0203 (talk) 02:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

In TVguide.com it says there are 89 episodes, but that is the count for the list of links they have listed below of episodes which include a few duplicates (such as "Hotel Hangout" which is listed three times). A Disney magazine did say the total will be 88 episodes, so I am absolutely sure of that. I know episode 88 will be "The S.S. Tipton" and I am also absolutely sure it is a 30 minute episode considering the youtube video of it is just over 20 minutes (standard half hour programming without commercial time). So it seems out of common sense we can come to those conclusions. I am unsure, however, of what episodes 86 and 87 will be. I have seen three different episode titles that I cannot confirm from what I believe is a reliable source, so I think it is best to wait for further confirmation before we advertise episodes 86 and 87 as episodes because the titles/stories may only be rumor. So far I've heard "Zack or Cody", "Mr. Tipton Comes To Town", and "Misbehaving Concert", none of which I can confirm from what I find as a reliable source and one of them MUST be rumor because there will be 88 episodes total GUARANTEED by a Disney magazine. Let's just try to be patient. JLKTENNIS43 (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.237.119 (talk) 06:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Alyson Stoner

Nobody had proof that she is in Season 3, so until then, I'm deleting her name from Doin Time in Suite 2330. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.228.79 (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

OK. We'll see. --Gary0203 (talk) 07:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, she muight be there, so don't delete something that you don't have any proof that it needs to be deleted. --TheMinigolfMaster111 (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Last episodes scheduling

I'm the one who does the Toon Zone thread that posts when premiere episodes will be shown on Disney Channel -- and is being used here as a source for air dates. And, as far as "Let Us Entertain You", the schedule distributed by Disney Channel has is on Aug. 16 and it is production number 321. Is there another one after that? You can't tell by what I have. But "Entertain" IS the last new episode of Z&C for August -- but NOT the last episode of the series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.10.229 (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think since that's the series finale that will be the last episode and "On Deck" will start in September as previous discussed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.10.229 (talk) 15:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The August schedule for Disney's Video On Demand service shows that ep #322 -- "Mr. Tipton Comes to Visit" -- will be in the VOD lineup on August 30. Disney's M.O. is to put an episode on VOD exactly one week before they put it on Disney Channel or Toon Disney. Secondly, Multichannel News reports [1] that "On Deck" will premiere on Friday, Sept. 27.

That makes sense. At least we know said episode really does exist.

And Mr. College will be very surprised when the September schedules come out and it is shown to be true that "Comes to Town" will be shown three weeks AFTER "S.S. Tipton." Does it make sense? Of course not. But this is Disney, where sense is not a job requirement.

What are you basing your information off of?

I'm the one who does this -- http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=213100 -- (I'm Burg) and I've seen the VOD schedules. Of course, my posting of the info isn't quite kosher in the (I think) too-strict credibility rules here.

Haha...that's funny because I'm the first one to put toonzone.net as a source (check history)! My name is also DCFan101 in toonzone.net By the way, is the Video on Demand schedule on the internet??? If yes, where? --DCFan101 (talk) 08:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It is, but only to credentialed people. (My credentials come from my real newspaper job, all this Disney stuff is pure gravy) That's where other Wiki mods have issues and won't call me a verifiable source by the letter of the Wiki-rules. They're not saying I'm wrong -- just not verifiable since Toon Zone also isn't an official site of anything, either. Burg44 (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I would think that, while Disney does have the tendency to air episodes out of order, they would make an effort to make the series finale the last episode. Besides, it seems that the episode airs on a cruise ship, the new spin-off series takes place on a cruise ship, therefore, the last episode should be Let Us Entertain Yu / S. S. Tipton. Just like with the Season 3 summer "story arc". Except for one episode (intentionally aired earlier due to the release of High School Musical 2), they kept the summer "story arc" together. Also, other Disney shows had their series finale be the last episode. I assumed the same thing applied here.Mr. College (talk) 03:25, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

You make all the sense in the world. I'm just posting what I see -- 1) that "Entertain You" is a ONE-part episode (prod. #321), and 2) "Mr. Tipton Comes to Visit" (prod. #322) debuts on the VOD schedule three weeks after "Entertain You" and, for as long as I've paid attention to the VOD schedule, it's been almost an exact pre-cursor to how the Disney Channel/Toon Disney schedules unfold. Burg44 (talk) 17:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Guys, I just checked TV Guide and it doesn't list any new episodes before Let Us Entertain You other than Doin' Time in Suite 2330 and Let Us Entertain You is only a 30 minute episode. PLEASE STOP CHANGING THE EPISODES. --72.234.211.105 (talk) 06:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Let Us Entertain You/The S.S. Tipton has to be a 2 part episode because Gary Marsh of Disney Channel International say there are 88 episodes. And are any of your reference off the Disney Channel website.(I know so so use disney channel as your reference before you change it.) --Cory Malik (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The video in YouTube is only about 20 minutes so if its 20 minutes without commercials it must only be a 30-minute episode. Also, I think there is another unknown episode. It is also discussed on a previous discussion. --72.234.211.105 (talk) 06:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I have seen the video on youtube too and there is The S.S. Tipton (1) Part 1-3 and The S.S. Tipton (2) Part 1-3 if it hasnt been deleted yet --Cory Malik (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no Part 1 and Part 2. I know who uploaded the episode not exactly personal. It was dani12b and I messaged him if it was 1 hour long episode and he said its 30 minutes. Also, if you check TV Guide it doesn't have the episode written twice. But, The Suite Life Goes Hollywood is an hour long episode and it is written twice.--DCFan101 (talk) 18:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The Disney Channel tv guide on DisneyChannel.com (This is the best source you can use) says Let Us Entertain You is a 30 minute episode. i was wrong. --Cory Malik (talk) 01:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's some new info from the Disney/ESPN Affiliate site. It suggests a NEW premiere date for "Mr. Tipton Comes to Visit." Disney Channel is running a 14-episode Suite-a-Thon on Labor Day -- Monday, Sept. 1. And it ends with "Entertain" at 8:00 p.m. and "Comes to Visit" at 8:30 p.m. I have two schedule sources and if the second corroborates this info, then it's probably going to happen that way. Burg44 (talk) 16:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The September Disney Channel schedule is out and it confirms two things about "Comes to Visit" -- 1) It's premiering on Labor Day night Sept.1 and 2) it IS the LAST Z&C episode before the premiere of On Deck later in the month. But Disney has a history of hanging on an episode of a series AFTER showing what was commonly accepted as the series finale. (Raven) So, is there a "lost" Z&C episode? Can't tell. But it ain't airing in September 2009. Burg44 (talk) 03:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I hate to be a party-pooper, but you all keep digging for a September pre-SLOD air date for "The S.S. Tipton" that just isn't there. Burg44 (talk) 04:29, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Medieval Magic Quest Game

Disney had a 'Medieval Magic Quest' Game developed for the program.

http://tv.disney.go.com/disneychannel/suitelifeondeck/yous/games/medievalquest/index.html

88 episodes or not?

I've just removed (again) a section about an 88th episode that is full of uncited speculation. This information failed Wikipedia:Verifiability and was therefore a clear candidate for removal. It should not be added again unless appropriate citations from reliable sources are provided.

On that note, tv.com states that the series is ended[2] and that there are only 87 episodes[3], so the chances of the 88th episode are nil. However, imdb.com lists 88 episodes as having already aired[4], with the last having been "Mr. Tipton Comes to Visit". While the different totals at the sites is puzzling, which is an issue that needs to be addressed, both clearly deny the possibility of another episode. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The following has been copied from my talk page:

I read Talk:List of The Suite Life of Zack & Cody episodes#88 episodes or not? and then made the edit. All i had on there was TBA and that is not "full of uncited speculation." TBA means nothing is known about it yet but there is a quote from a disney president about the episodes IF you check my source. It was not a page of a magazine from another site on that site. It was in quotations because that what they said. They also did this with That's So Raven. They kept an episode for 8 months and another one for 3 months after TSR was thought to be over & CITH had already started. This is the source:
"Our audience has shown us that after 88 episodes, 'The Suite Life of Zack & Cody' remains one of their favorite sitcoms ever," said Gary Marsh, president of entertainment at Disney Channels Worldwide. "We decided to find a new way for Zack, Cody, London and Mr. Moseby to live 'The Suite Life' in a whole new setting -- this time aboard a luxury cruise liner."

--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 02:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

--AussieLegend (talk) 10:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The referenced "TBA" was not the issue. The main body of the section read "Notes: This is a lost episode of The Suite Life of Zack & Cody. It is unknown if it will air or be a extra on a DVD or even be released to the public at all", which was most certainly uncited speculation and therefore subject to removal.

In addition to being uncited speculation it was also wrong. As I've already stated, IMDB lists 88 episodes as having aired while tv.com lists 87. Examination of imdb's list revealed that the episode missing from this list and tv.com was "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire".[5] According to imdb that episode aired on 24 April 2008, although apparently it was not in the US. The confusion over the missing episode appears to have been created by whoever compiled the original list. They haven't followed the instructions at Template:Episode list and have made the list US-centric. The list should list original airdates, ie the original airing date of the episode regardless of where in the world it occurs, but instead they've listed only US dates and so have missed this particular episode. I've corrected this, as well as some other issues, so there should be no problem any more. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you read the summary for "Who Want's To Be A Millionare". It made NO sense. It was obviously a ploy of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?. That episode did have a ref though. It is not speculation if it comes from a Disney Rep. It is true. They did the same thing with That's So Raven as I stated above.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thee summary for Who Wants To Be A Millionaire was poorly worded but that's not unusual. The Disney rep said there were going to be 88 episodes. In the reference you provided there was nothing to support your claim about lost episodes. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

To be a very crediable source, you have to have more than, "I read it on IMDB." It is just like wikipedia, people can edit it. I am going to revert your edit because you are the ONLY person to dispute the prod. # and air dates without saying why or opening a discussion. Doing that that to an article is a dramatic and sudden change and needs to be discussed.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 03:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

"without saying why or opening a discussion"? Hello!!! I created this section 2 days ago for that very reason and, for the record, I haven't disputed production numbers, only the airdates as published by reliable source. but if you want to get into the production numbers, where are the references for them? --AussieLegend (talk) 03:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

So what is you reliable source that you did not have them refed just like mine and didnt put it in your edit summary and i removed episode 88 and do not add "Millionaire" back per stated above.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The reliable source is IMDB anmd was referenced correctly, as I've explained on your talk page. There's no reason for not including "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire". It's cited by the source and has an airdate. If you want to dispute IMDB then you'll have to provide some proof that IMDB is not a relaible source after which you'll need to proivide full citations for evry episode. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Also you did dispute prod. #'s because you move season 3 eps. to season 2. seasons can overlap. Just look at That's So Raven. --Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 04:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Not true. Moving episodes is not disputing production numbers. Production numbers generally have no relevance to airdates. In any case, the production numbers, like most of the article, are uncited so there is no proof of their accuracy. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've added a disputed content tag to the article. Attempts to correct the article completely have been prevented by Cory Malik but he has "allowed" some changes. Unfortunately the partial corrections have introduced more errors and confusion. While the list should show original airdates, and is now titled that way, the dates are still US airdates. I've corrected column headings so they comply with the template and MOS but these dates still need to be changed. There seems no dispute that there are 88 episodes and this needed to be addressed to avoid confusion, as only 87 episodes are listed, so I've added an appropriately cited comment regarding this, in the process removing some uncited speculation that had previously been removed. The main errors remaining, as of this revision, are the episode numbers and the original airdates list. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Even if the seasons overlaped. Do not add Season 3 ep to the season 2 sectin. Just change the airdate.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Also I doubt if this Millonaire ep. actually exists,if you seach the internet, it is nowhere to be found exept IMDb. I did a real extensive search, but found nothing execpt the Merideth Viera show.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you understand Wikipedia's policy that everything must be verifiable. It's not just a matter of changing an airdate. Everything in the article must be supported by the citations. That means that episode & production numbers, titles, airdates and episode summaries must be supported by the citations. Until I added the IMDB citation there was no citation supporting any of the episode information. As such it was subject to complete removal at any time. This is stated in the very first paragraph of Wikipedia:Verifiability. My edits made the article supported by the citation as it should be. If you disagree with what the article says then you need citations to support your changes and you need to provide a citation for each change. Merely reverting changes that you don't agree with, such as you did here, is not acceptable. You know this because you were blocked for edit-warring in August[6]. Edit warring in the same manner may result in a longer block next time.

Regarding the millionaire episode, the text I added included an inline citation from a reliable source. You know there are 88 episodes, The citation supports that and provides a name for the 88th episode. Unless you can provide a citation proving that it isn't the 88th episode you should not remove it. To do so is vandalism. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

First I deleted the Millionaire ep. because i did entensive research on the episode that was never heard of. Well when I finished my search the only site that had info about it was iMDd so i removed it, so you should search too. And also in August I did not know abou the Edit Warring policy, but i knew of lots of other policy, the block was judt for that. But you are just being stubborn and do noot want to except that your episode is fan speculation.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 03:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

What was your extensive research? Googling perhaps? Did you happen to notice that most of the sites seem to get their information straight from tv.com, which only lists 87 episodes, errors and all? You may not have known about the policies when you were first blocked but you do now. As for the episode being fan specualtion, please prove that. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I can prove it as speculation. But can you prove it exists.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 02:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The citation from IMDB proves that it exists. That's how {{WP:V]] works. If you can really prove it to be speculation, why have you not done so? That would end the discussion. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Let me prove it now. As you know, anyone can be a user of IMDb. As you may not know, most of the time on the site, some info on the site is incorrect. And beccause I also occasionaly edit there. With their policy, it is basically impossibale to change or delete episode edits after they have been posted to the site. I used 7 search engines and the only site that said anything about this episode existing is IMDb. That is what made me conclude that it was plain vandalism. Here are my searches:[7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], and the most important search"Who%20Wants%20To%20Be%20A%20Millionaire" 13.--Jay M. Baxter-Payne (talk) 06:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but that doesn't prove anything. Search engine results are not considered to be reliable sources. Your conclusion that since you were unable to find the episode it doesn't exist is original research and also unacceptable. Since you seem so eager to discredit the IMDB information and claim it is so easy to edit imdb data, you'll need to support that claim with a citation from a reliable source. That source will have to specifically state that the episode doesn't exist. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source (also: "Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for fact-checking."). AussieLegend, the burden of proof falls to you. If you are unable to provide a reliable source then Cory Malik's removal is correct and supported by policy. Matthew (talk) 08:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually there is no consensus as to whether or not IMDB is a reliable source or not. Consensus is what Wikipedia:Citing IMDb attempted to achieve and it failed. As for where the burden of proof lies, almost the whole article, like many other TV program related articles fails WP:V. I was attempting to resolve this by citing one source and giving the article some credibility. Without citations it has none. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Whether or not IMDb is reliable has been discussed ad infinitum. Although the impression I've always received is that only a small number of Wikipedians erroneously believe IMDb to be a reliable source :-). I had forgotten about Wikipedia:Citing IMDb; though it does only serve to strengthen my statement. Oh, and I'm not sure how citing IMDb would give the article "credibility" *shrug*... The article definitely needs some secondary sources, however. I am not opposed to you tagging the article as such. Matthew (talk) 10:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

It's hardly a small number of Wikipedians. There are at least 100,000 links to IMDB from the English Wikipedia alone.[14] Wikipedia:Citing IMDb failing doesn't strengthen anyone's argument for or against IMDB. The only conclusion you can really reach from that is that there must be roughly equal numbers on both sides. When you take into account the number of articles that use it as a source I think you have to find the "perception of credibility" scales tipping towards IMDB. I'm not saying IMDB is perfect. It isn't. No site really is. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Linking to IMDb for further information and using it to backup claims are two different things. I suspect that the vast majority of links to IMDb are in the External Links section. So no, without a percentage or total I'm not going to "find the 'perception of credibility' scales tipping towards IMDB". Anyhow, we're just going to have to agree to disagree as I'm not willing to argue with you. One would suspect, however, that if IMDb's information is correct that it would be corroborated by another independent source *shrug*. Matthew (talk) 11:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Linking to IMDB for more information is really not that different to using it to support specific claims. If it's not a reliable source it shouldn't be used at all, regardless of whether it's as a citation or an external link. Of the 30 or so links I randomly checked in the first 100,000 entries, the IMDB data was being used as citations in well over half. As for corroboration, somthing I noticed recently was that a lot of, and probably most, sites such as the external links in this article obviously use IMDB or TV.com as their source rather than generating their own listings. I say obviously because errors present in both of these sites have been transposed to their listings. Even worse, some use Wikipedia. The nature of these listings is that it's hard to find a site that you can be sure independently corroborates listings, which is probably why so many episode articles are devoid of citations. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Non-notable trivia and continuity issues

See also: Talk:List of The Suite Life on Deck episodes § Non-notable trivia and continuity issues

I have just removed some non-notable trivia from this article again.[15] Some editors seem to want to give this more weight than is justified, but it is an exceptionally minor continuity issue regarding two episodes in different series that are 148 episodes and six years apart. This article and List of The Suite Life on Deck episodes are episode lists. The episode summaries are supposed to summarise the important points in each episode and such minor continuity issues are outside the scope of the article. As per WP:TVPLOT, the episode summary is an overview of the episode's main events and minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, individual jokes and technical detail should be avoided. The fact that a minor comment in an episode in one series is not followed up 148 episodes and 6 years later in another series is simply not worth noting. It's trivial and just fancruft. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Air date differences in TV Guide and Zap2it

I discovered two episodes showing different original air dates between the two sources: (1) "Back in the Game" (season 2 episode 35; TV Guide: April 6, 2007; Zap2it: March 30, 2007); (2) "The Arwin That Came to Dinner" (season 3 episode 8; TV Guide: August 5, 2007; Zap2it: July 28, 2007). The prevailing source before I added Zap2it as an air date column reference in the article was TV Guide, so the air dates shown are coming from that. Aside from those two episodes, the dates in Zap2it match what is shown throughout the article. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: FWIW, Epguides also agrees with the TV Guide airdates for these (though, in this case, that may not mean much...). Unfortunately, this series predates The Futon Critics episode listings (TFC only has The Suite Life on Deck in its system), so there's no help there... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:49, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

When this series was airing it, along with The Suite Life on Deck, Hannah Montana, Wizards of Waverley Place and other kids' programs were articles with which I was involved because my children loved watching them. At the time, the most accurate episode guide was actually msn, but that is no longer available. I was a bit of a Nazi when it came to accuracy as we had many younger editors adding wildly inaccuate content (Nothing has really changed in that regard). The dates in the article at the time they aired are accurate. Zap2It's record for these and other programs has always been a bit of a worry. It was often wrong so I preferred not to use it. A check of the edit history shows that the dates currently in the article for "Back in the Game" and "The Arwin That Came to Dinner" are the dates on which they aired so I'm confident in saying that Zap2It is wrong. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)