Talk:High School Musical 2

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the High School Musical 2 article.
Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions. Please note this is not a forum for discussing the topic generally.	Talk page guidelines Please respect etiquette and assume good faith. Also be nice and remain civil.

Cast??

Why is Miley Cyrus in the cast list? She's in the show for like 2 seconds.

Error???

This should be removed, Gabreilla is proabbly wearing the neckalce because Troy stood up for his friends and this is a way of showing she forgives and still cares for him.

Grease (insert number here)

Should those be included in the titles (especially considering they are not connected in any way with either of the original Grease films)? I am leaning toward deleting the mentions? WAVY 10 14:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

For HSM 1 yes, because it was titled Greece 3 in some countries, I dunno if HSM2 has the same title or not. But HSM1 was titles Greece 3 in some countries. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 14:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Both of u are idiots okay.If that movie had a connection to grease it would not be on disney channel.I know that the plot of the movie may sound familiar but its not.Its musical of this generation. User:(Im right Ur rong so deal with it 242 )

Good Morning America

The main cast was interviewed on ABC's Good Morning America July 2nd. WAVY 10 18:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

What is this?

Anyone know anything about this entry?

"In an interview with azcentral.com, Lucas Grabeel stated that the one musical number he starred in (humuhumunukunukua'pua'a)was cut, to be saved as bonus material for the take-home dvd.(6)" WAVY 10 13:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• SIIIIGH* Vandalism. A search of AZ Central only mentions him as a Disney Alum in 06, and they're really good about putting up articles ASAFP. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 14:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

On the track listing for the HSM2 Soundtrack at amazon.co.uk (http://www.amazon.co.uk/High-School-Musical-Original-Soundtrack/dp/B000QCTGIE/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/026-0188879-4217255?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1184616392&sr=8-1)it states Humuhumunukunukuapua'a as a BONUS track. 86.153.70.160 20:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Pookilicious

Programming Info Released

The details are coming out regarding the August 17th debut of High School Musical 2 on Disney Channel. The premiere will be hosted from a backyard barbeque with the movie’s stars, Zac Efron, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Lucas Grabeel, Corbin Bleu, Monique Coleman, Olesya Rulin, Chris Warren, Jr., KayCee Stroh and Ryne Sanborn, and with director/choreographer Kenny Ortega.

It’s also been confirmed a new episode of Hannah Montana will air following the show guest starring Hollywood Records recording artists the Jonas Brothers. They will join Hannah Montana for her first ever full-length duet, performing an original song created for this episode. In the storyline, Miley Stewart is jealous when her dad, Robby, is songwriting with Kevin, Joe and Nick Jonas. Starring are Miley Cyrus and Billy Ray Cyrus, Emily Osment and Jason Earles.

Then of course for the encore performances throughout the weekend. On August 18th a Wildcat Chat featuring an interactive element where viewers get their questions answered by the stars of High School Musical 2. Plus, on 19th they’ll be airing a Sing-Along version.

http://tommy2.net/content/?p=1676

Can you source this? WAVY 10 13:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Tommy2.net purports itself to being in the know, and having contact with folks on the show. This was the site who's runner was upset we listed the citable info about the salary dispute. While I don't doubt that they have this information, they're not really a citable source since they're a fan site. Which sucks :P -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 14:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

What makes something a 'fan' site and something that is not? Obviously the Disney people take care of that site and it's pretty safe to assume there is a decent amount of money being made.--75.64.158.182 21:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

A 'fan' site is run by a fan. Tommy2 is run by a fan, not Disney. Disney.com is run by Disney :) -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 21:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a funny discussion. Here's my two cents. Check the 'Thank Yous' on both Ashley Tisdale and Corbin Bleu's CD's, particulary under the 'Media'. I'll take their word over yours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 17.255.240.90 (talk • contribs)

Heh. Having not seen that (I bought the cds online), that means little. Indigo Girls CDs thank fan sites. Basically, it's not a reliable, trusted media outlet. And not, I'm not disputing the information! I just don't think they're credible enough for Wikipedia's guidelines. Which sucks donkey parts cause it's useful, but it's on that edge. And what sucks more? New York Post is a trusted media outlet. And it's six inches from being a tabloid. If someone can find a news outlet that supports that info, we're good! -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 00:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that tommy2.net qualifies as a credible news source. If you go back into their archives, you will see that they have done a good job of checking their sources when they report something. What makes something a credible news source, IMHO is (1) they have been reporting in the market for a reasonable period of time, and (2) they have a good track record. tommy2.net qualifies on both counts.

tommy2.net has been reporting on the 'tween' demographic space for several years, and has even broken some stories. I don't find inaccuracies in their reporting. I would not have any problem citing them as a credible source. A fan site is run by a fan to promote some specific group or person. I fail to see how tommy2.net qualifies as a fan site. It appears to me that it is a journal, devoted to reporting on current events in the 'tween' demographic space. I understand that the publisher of the "Wall Street Journal" is a fan of business. Does that make the "Wall Street Journal online" a fan site? If your qualification for a trusted news source is something that also has a widely distributed paper counterpart, then "Weekly World News" would certainly qualify, as it is distributed at millions of grocery counters worldwide. --TweenMarketDemographer 18:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll try saying this another way ... If someone can give media exposure wherein Tommy2.net is mentioned as a source (that is can you find a source where they're cited as the source), then we have verifiability. I really wish they'd cite their sources, though. Basically we're being asked to take their word for this without them even saying something like 'According to sources at Disney....'. Check out WP:RS. Posting about it here would be the best way to go about it :) -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 18:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

What is that, a press release? WAVY 10 18:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess that I am confused about what your objective in this posting is. Is the issue to determine whether or not tommy2.net is a credible news source? I have defined my metrics of what a credible news source is, and they fit those metrics. If you feel that I am incorrect, then perhaps you would define your metrics of (a) a credible news source and (b) a fan site, then we can continue this discussion based on the merits of those metrics. It also appears that you think that, in order to be a trusted news source, you have to have been cited as such in a major market outlet. Let's say, for example, that I publish a weekly newspaper in a town of 10,000 people. It is very possible that none of my news stories have ever appeared, or been verified by, any major news outlet. Does this make me an "untrusted" journal? Should my 4 or 5 thousand subscribers not believe what I am printing, just because a major news outlet has never cited us? --TweenMarketDemographer 19:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The reason for my remark is that the previous post read more like a press release than a defense for using it. WAVY 10 19:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

My reason for my remark is that outside of the various times tommy2.net followers have posted here, I've never heard of it. It's a website without a physical magazine/print, I've never seen it referenced by other news sources, and they don't credit their sources. I haven't seen any reason to trust them any more than I would a blog. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 19:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Sir, just because you personally have never heard of them has absolutely no relevance in the discussion of whether or not they are a reliable news source. They have at least thousands of regular readers. The print media space is very crowded. There are hundreds, if not thousands of journals published that I personally have never heard of. But that has absoluletly no relavence to their merit as reliable sources. You are going to have to do better than that, I am afraid.

Tell me, sir. Do you consider TMZ.com to be a reliable source? Do you consider PerezHilton.com to be a reliable source? If so, by what metrics do you consider them to be a reliable source that you are certain do not apply to tommy2.net? --TweenMarketDemographer 19:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd go NO on the PerezHilton.com site. WAVY 10 19:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide a source wherein tommy2.net is credited, by an external site, preferable a major news outlet, but a kid magazine like tiger beat will do, as the source of information? If you can't, then I stick by my guns. If you can, then that's all I ever wanted :) Third party proof. If it really is all that, then this shouldn't be hard. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 19:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

In the interest of objectivity, please, tell us, since we are supposed to be objective here, what specific metrics did you use to determine that TMZ.com WAS a reliable source, and that PerezHilton.com WAS NOT? I think that is a fair question.-- Also, if I am understanding your reasoning correctly, then we should go through all of Wikipedia, and strike any small town newspapers who have been cited as a "source" unless they can prove that they themselves have been cited as a reliable source by a major publication. Is this correct? TweenMarketDemographer 20:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

If it falls under this, then yes. That's what I'm saying. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 23:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I opened up a dialogue over at Reliable Sources/Noticeboard since we seem to be at an impasse. I feel tommy2.net counts as a personal webpage, or blog (by the Wikipedia sources definition) and therefore while accurate isn't good to use as a source. One possible way of doing that is by third-party approval. I.E. another website that is reputable cites this one. It's not the only way to do it, but the first one that came to mind. As they don't cite their sources (See Futon Critic for a site that does), it's hard to just look at this and go 'aha!' Since it's sketchy, I think it's our responsibility to be able to back up what we believe. So please, help me :) Don't accuse me, since you could spend the time finding a way to prove your point (which, again, I'm not opposing, I'm just wanting to verify first). -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 23:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I think there's one thing your are missing here. It's called 'New Media'. Here's a scenario very familiar. Take for example a page I have found here at Wikipedia for a guy named Wade Keller. He created a newsletter in Jr. High called the Pro Wrestling Torch. He isn't referred to at all in the top Wrestling magazines... you should know better that they would never credit the competition (similar to PopStar Magazine not referencing Tommy2.Net, yet using an obscure story referenced 3 months earlier). According to your page, Wade doesn't site sources and guess what? He's a huge fan of wrestling. While Tommy2.Net is in it's infancy compared to the Torch, it is obvious that it has it's fair share of breaking news prior to anyone else in addition to things that suggest it is well respected by those in the industry. Have you actually listened to any of the audio features or read it on a daily basis? For other credibility you might just want to use 'Google' and don't forget the two publications someone sourced way at the top of this page. I'll bet there are more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.25.164 (talk)

No. The interviews are primary sources and should not be relied on to verify the information in the article. As for the rest of the site it is neither considered an authoritive source nor do we have any guarentees that they check their facts. As an unofficial rule of thumb, sites that would not pass WP:WEB should never be considered reliable sources. It is my firm belief that this site would not pass WP:WEB. There is also the risk of fact laundering where something of otherwise dubious thruthfulness is being passed on as the truth because it was reported by a reliable source. It's an article about an upcoming movie - stick to the bare facts for now and then expand once we have some reliable secondary sources. Keep in mind that we are not a news service. We are editors, not journalists. That's why we don't rely on primary sources. We use secondary reliable sources because that way we know that someone has already checked the facts. The criteria for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. MartinDK 14:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Straight from the RS notice board. The site doesn't count as a Reliable Source. Doesn't matter if you think it's a good source for info or not, it doesn't pass policy. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 16:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Find some secondary sources that back up what Tommy2.net says, and we can add the stuff in. Otherwise we're blowing hot air. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 17:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

http://www.reuters.com/article/televisionNews/idUSN1529894020070716 Over 24 hours later Reuters delivers the story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.14.184.90 (talk)

See? Was that so hard? :) -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 19:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Knowing this information WAS correct and was posted here 24 hours prior. Now that is confirmed and verified shouldn't your original source be credited? Isn't the reporter who breaks a story the one who gets the credit? Not the networks that follow 24 hours later? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.25.164 (talk • contribs)

The information is slightly different between the two accounts, so I went with the one that's already reliable. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 20:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... I'm starting to think you're not that great at your job. You forgot to list the Sing-Along version on the 19th. Going back, one broke the story, another one confirmed it. Did over 50% of the content come from Tommy2.Net? I think so. Clearly you people have a chip on your shoulder.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.25.164 (talk • contribs)

You need to read WP:RS and WP:V. We do not report breaking news, we wait until someone (like Reuters) confirms it because then we know that a reliable secondary source confirmed it. We do not credit those you claim broke the story (Reuters does not cite them). For the last time... the criteria for inclusion is verifiability not truth. We are not a gossip site. If you do not accept that then too bad... because that's how it is. Also, and I can't believe this had to be explicitly stated, PerezHilton.com is not a reliable source. Nor is a news letter by a kid in junior high. Why are you so eager to get as many links as possible to tommy2.net on Wikipedia? MartinDK 11:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that this is not a job (I don't get paid for this, I'm not even an Admin) and the point of Wikipedia is not 'breaking news' but documentation of facts. Once the facts are proven, does it matter who's cited or that the recorded history is out there? I care about the latter, you care about the former. And in that scenario, Wikipedia's not the place for you. You're just going to get upset, and I'm sorry about that. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 13:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

A few publications where tommy2.net has been cited as a source:

http://freshreleases.com/news/1305.html[1]

http://www.thechristianpulse.com/content/view/175/35/[2]

http://www.christianmusictimes.com/BarlowGirl/tabid/167/Default.aspx[3]

--TweenMarketDemographer 19:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Archive

The page is 31 KB. Can we archive the first half of the page? WAVY 10 16:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 19:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

the Music Video info

I think the information about the music videos should be moved under the soundtrack section.

Agreed. WAVY 10 18:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• I agree. It makes more sense. Snoborder93 22:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Trevor Bolton?

Who is this character? WAVY 10 16:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is the father of Troy Bolton Wizkid357 06:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

New Releases Date

On the italian wikipedia there are more releases date! Write them! --81.208.83.241 08:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Followed by High School Musical 1?

In the box, it write : Followed by High School Musical 1, it's wrong, it's High School Musical 3!

• I edited it back to High School Musical 3. It was probably vandalism.AquafireGal 11:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

What Time is It? (Air time)

The article says 9:00 p.m., but I saw a commercial on Disney Channel Saturday saying 8:00 p.m. (The normal DCOM premiere time). Which is correct? WAVY 10 15:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I would assume 8:00pm since that's when most DCOMs premier. I also wrote it in my calendar as 8pm so I would think that was what the commercials said. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Fios Tv Customers able to view Movie starting Aug. 10th

This friday, Verizon FiOS TV customers have access to HSM 2 via the FiOS On Demand service a full week before its scheduled release on the 17th. plenty of sources available.

-For any disbelievers the person isn't lying. When the first one came out, it came out on io a week early too. I just finished watching HSM 2.

Spoilers

The plot ending is spoiled in the plot area, and thus there should be warning. I'm not 100% sure how to put these warnings up myself properly, so if someone could do that, that would be great!

It doesn't seem fair to spoil the movie before it has even aired. I think the brief synopsis that is provided is fine for now. Once the movie has aired, the plot can be updated. Danielh8675 14:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Comcast TV

According to www.TVplanner.comcast.net it seems to suggest that disney will air 2 more encore presentations of this movie. can someone confirm this and then add to the page?

If you mean Saturday and Sunday, Disney always does that with new DCOM's. WAVY 10 13:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

We don't need to mention every freaking time the movie airs. Why is that important? -Sukecchi 14:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

More Like the HSM Article

I personally think that we should revise this article to more resemble the High School Musical article. I mean, we could add a song section and other section that the HSM article has that this article does not. Obviously, we cannot add the Other Media, Awards, and DVD sections until those things come into play. But the characters (which would replace the cast) and the song section we could add.Snoborder93 01:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Same here...once the movie comes out! WAVY 10 17:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

May I?

I've seen the movie on-demand on Cablevision already. Is it okay if you let me update the plot after the premiere because I know it will be a revert/edit mess minutes after the credits start. I have a confirmed and perfect plot ready for Wikipedians to see. It seems appropriate enough for Wikipedia to understand and view. If you need to ask me questions, ask now. I am still following the notice of not editing the plot with the complete spoiler and only asking for permission. Accepting this may prevent messes around the article's plot section. --AOL Alex 20:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

After the (official {meaning Friday}) premiere is fine with me. WAVY 10 20:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yesh, also, i'm afraid that the one on IMdb is a bit too long... shouldn't someone shorten it here without editing IMdb's full plot? --AOL Alex 00:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus cameo

Iv'e seen many times on here (And other articles)that Miley Cyrus is is doing a cameo in the movie. Yet, I don't see it in here. Can some one who's already seen it (Thanks to Disney on Demand) prove it, then add it? By the way, there's a 1 in 4 chance she's in it, since it was on a poll people took to choose little things that might happen in the movie (about 1/2 a year ago). Abcw12 09:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think some of the editors felt that, since it's a brief cameo, it's not exactly important enough to include on this page (as opposed to Miley's page). WAVY 10 16:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

She is in the very last song, toward the end. She is wearing a yellow dress and is dancing, with some guy.- seth21136

That's why it's not important. She's in the background, dancing with some guy there's no detail about it. Sign your posts properly please, with four "~" -Sukecchi 21:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Since this is the legendary Wikipedia, the collective knowledge of every users on the web, shouldn't this page contain all relative information about the movie even the minor details? For a normal encyclopedia this kind of small detail may not matter but for people who watch movies for star cameo appearances this kind of information may matter somewhat.

I agree. Maybe this cameo could be in a trivia section.Mr Kupo 05:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Can Someone please add this!

If someone that is able to edit the page can add this link, or the information that his link provides. Thank you!

[4]

Cheetahg29 18:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Please add to article: While the movie is supposed to take place in new mexico, the license plate on one of the cars is from Utah.

Review in USA Today/Notability

I read the Life section for today's (August 17) USA Today, and the reviewers give HSM2 a 3-star review. Since I have never seen a DCOM (including HSM1) achieve a rating higher than 2.5 stars, would that rating prove especially notable? WAVY 10 20:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

You meant...

You meant every country has to have its premiere in order for me to edit and add the plot? Because 10 seconds later, someone reverted it, as if they wanted every country to have its premiere first (Including Italy and Spain). --AOL Alex 04:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)