Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Rock 2


 * 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   no consensus to delete (default to keep); article has been merged into Camp Rock. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 22:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Camp Rock 2

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Prod deleted. The fact that a sequel is being considered does not justify the amount of unsupported speculation in this article. Consideration of a sequel is the only unique and referenced material in this article and can easily be included in the Camp Rock article. A redirect to Camp Rock would be sufficient until enough unique information is available to support an article on the sequel. NrDg 04:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree/Delete. Presumptive (talk) 04:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with Camp Rock per WP:CRYSTAL. Wait till more sources arise. — 97198   talk  13:07, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is premature --T-rex 15:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Dont Delet - The article should not be deleted because its going to be remade, so there is no reason why to delet it know and remake it later. And info about the movie is just coming out I will recieve more info in around 1-2 months (July-August) and if no info is realesed within a 1-2 month period the the article can be readmited or suggested for deletion again and pluss the plot was just aded!. Salcan (talk) 18:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Strike because of later comment. --NrDg 22:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete i also suspect Salcan, the article creator, is a User:House1090 sock, based on their shared inability to understand copyright plagiarism and tendency to put bogus block notices on the user pages of editors they disagree with, as well as propensity to edit San Bernardino area articles. Their bad grammar is also a match. Amerique dialectics 20:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Checkuser result: likely Amerique dialectics 15:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge with Camp Rock as suggested. It's relevant to that page, enough to warrant inclusion, but not presently enough for its own article. - Vianello (talk) 06:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. From http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2008/06/demi_lovato_and_the_jonas_brot.html Michael Healy, Disney Channel's senior vice president for original movies said about a sequel "We hope so, but we don't know yet, each one of these movies has to stand own its own and succeed or fail, then we evaluate it." This is confirmation that this article is pure WP:CRYSTAL speculation including in the reference used in the article. --NrDg 15:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with Camp Rock I have reaserched and there is no word out about the plot or Selena Gomez coming out in the nextfilm, I creaed it hoping to find more information.Salcan (talk) 17:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep; although some of it (first paragraph) may be speculation, there is enough referenced content confirming the plans for this movie&mdash;and the fact that it is already attracting significant interest and speculation&mdash;to warrant an article. Everyking (talk) 07:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * MergeI say that we wait until there's more information about Camp Rock 2, and then make a larger article about it. Right now, the artcile is just saying things about when it'll be released and such, which isn't good information for a whole article. We can just keep Camp Rock 2 as part of the orginal Camp Rock article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soccer5525 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge . If we get anything passing the usual sniff test saying there will be a sequel, then we can get started on it. Until then, remove (update: User:Gary0203 has a sandbox version he had just in case, so I changed my statement from Delete or Merge to just Delete. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 19:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Today on TheHollywoodReporter.com, it said that a sequel was in the works, and was planned for a release in 09/10. --Yankeesrj12 (talk) 22:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.67.239 (talk) 03:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep/Comment - WP:CRYSTAL said "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented." Yes, it is certain to take place and preparation for the movie is already in progress. The article includes pre-production and production informations, its in good status except that banner in the top:} Also, Michael Healy's comment "We hope so, but we don't know yet, each one of these movies has to stand on its own and succeed or fail, then we evaluate it." was before Camp Rock premiered and the movie scored high ratings so it will definitely be made. It's also longer than I expected. Gary0203 (talk) 08:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no issue with reporting verifiable information about a possible film. However, per the notability guidelines for future films, a stand-alone article is not appropriate until production begins, which is never a guarantee in the film industry.  Without this guarantee, there's no certainty of a plot section, a cast section, a production section, a reception section, and so forth.  It is too opinionated to say, "It'll be made -- give it time."  Films like Logan's Run (2010 film) and Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film) have been significant projects that still have not been produced for many years. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 14:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect into a sequel section at Camp Rock. The notability guidelines for future films stipulates that a stand-alone article should not be created until a project enters production. This is because many factors such as budget issues, scripting issues, and casting issues can interfere with the project. Even on projects which are a supposed lock for a greenlight. This goes the same for TV movies as it does for intended cinema releases. The article can be reinstated when and if principal photography begins.  Steve  T • C 13:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge any relevant information to Camp Rock (I suggest renaming to Camp Rock#Sequel). Article should not be resurrected from a redirect status unless filming of the sequel is confirmed to have begun, per the notability guidelines for future films.  See Shantaram (film) for a similar merged example of a film that was planned to begin production but has not been able to. — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 14:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge until production starts  Gtstricky Talk or C 19:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.