Talk:List of Disney Channel original films

Suite Life On Deck Movie Rankings

According to the Suite Life Movie page, the movie received 14 million views. That means the movie is ranked second and beat out Wizards of Waverly Place. SOMEONE FIX THE PAGE!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.24.174 (talk) 19:49, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

First DCOM: We've got a problem...

Folks, we have a problem here. The following two sources, which I've been using since June 2016 very clearly say that Under Wraps (film) is considered to be the first DCOM: However, Spshu has just produced as Washington Post reference that claims Northern Lights (1997 film) is the first DCOM. So now we have a conflict between sources. (FTR, I feel more comfortable with my sources from June 2016, as I believe not counting Northern Lights gets Adventures in Babysitting (2016 film) to be the 100th DCOM. Also Under Wraps was included in the Summer 2016 retrospective of DCOMs, whereas I don't believe Northern Lights was...) Anyway, what do we do now? Pinging @Geraldo Perez, Amaury, and MPFitz1968: --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Speculation on the IMDB indicates that it was "disowned" as DCOM because a main character was a heavy smoker. Or there was a period where neither Disney Channel Premiere Films nor Disney Channel Original Movies brand was used possible Premears (indicate usourced in the article) or none. Although it was to have used the new banner that was chosen latter (DCOM). Thus making it easy to disown it as a DCOM. Spshu (talk) 13:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That's possible. But I'm more concerned that we've got conflicting sources on this. The thing is, we've got 2 sources claiming that Under Wraps (film) is the first DCOM versus just 1 source saying that Northern Lights (1997 film) was the first. And it's verifiably provable that Under Wraps was indeed a DCOM – it's right there on the poster art that's shown at the article. OTOH, the poster art at Northern Lights does not include the phrase "Disney Channel Original Movie" – that's pretty good evidence to me that Northern Lights wasn't actually "branded" as a DCOM (at least not "officially"). Finally, I would point out that Disney is the one that gets to say what is a "DCOM" and what isn't, and one of the two sources I've cited above specifically says "Disney Channel considers 1997’s Under Wraps as its first official DCOM..." That all says to me that Northern Lights should be moved out of the DCOM list and back into the list above it. The only question in my mind is whether we should then put a 'note' on Northern Lights indicating that some sources (e.g. The Washington Post) describe Northern Lights as the "first DCOM" – and, on that question, I am inclined to think that a 'note' containing the WaPo source is warranted. Any other opinions on this?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Since we have two sources saying Under Wraps was the first DCOM, I'm thinking we should go by that. Northern Lights, as you said, isn't labeled as a DCOM, so I'm thinking it was just a movie that happened to be aired on Disney Channel. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:48, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I actually think Northern Ligths was a "proto" DCOM (probably when Disney was just starting to define the brand). But I do think that Under Wraps is the first "official" DCOM, as per Disney's own comments. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

When we have two reliable sources with conflicting info we should be sure to cover both in the article. Seems to me that DCOM can mean either a brand or a description "A movie that first aired on DC or one of its predecessors" vs a movie that we (Disney Channel) have decided to slap the brand DCOM on. The sources look to be using different definitions. Reading the note, the reference is using the descriptive version, not the branding version to declare membership in the group. I'd go with what Disney decides is their brand if that is what is decided to go in the table but be sure to cover the conflict in references in the article somewhere. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:51, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

That's my plan – move Northern Lights back into the first list, but add a note (with source) indicating that some sources refer to it as the first "DCOM". But all the evidence presented here, and at Northern Lights (1997 film) and Under Wraps (film), pretty conclusively shows that Under Wraps is the first "official" DCOM, as per Disney Channel. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I was going to agree, but on MTV's list of 99 DCOMs (for polling readers), Northern Lights is listed there at #99. Spshu (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

My suggested way to handle this is still the best way forward – we're going to note that some sources consider Northern Lights to be a DCOM. But the EW ref definitively says that Disney Channel considers Under Wraps to be the first DCOM. Disney Channel is ultimately the one who gets to define what films are DCOM's and what aren't. (As for the MTV ref, they must be missing one – I'll try to figure out which one they're missing later...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:20, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

If the table documents the brand, then Disney gets to define what movies get to have that brand. What they say is authoritative. That others consider things different than Disney is interesting and should be in the article but where depends on the inclusion criteria for the tables. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

We don't take orders from Disney, we base it on actual facts - not that we completely disregard their future application of the brand name. If Northern Lights was originally branded as a DisCh Original Movie and later disowned/debranded as one then it should be listed as a DCOM with the notation that Disney no longer brands/considers the film as such. If Northern was just a made for Disney Channel movie, or a Proto-DCOM, then yes we list it with the Pre-DCOM with the notation that some sources consider it the first DCOM. (It looks like Sharpay's Fabulous Adventure is not on the MTV poll - possibly being a DTV release first.) Spshu (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Disney would be one of the sources we follow, and because they actually determine "branding" they're actually most important source we follow. And your two sources don't actually say "Northern Lights was originally 'branded' as a DCOM" – the MTV simply includes it in the list of the other DCOMs; only WaPo calls in the "first" DCOM, but even they don't say exactly that. What would be more definitive would be source from 1997 that actually called Northern Lights a "Disney Channel Original Movie" (in title caps). But I keep coming back to the poster art – Northern Lights' poster does not say "Disney Channel Original Movie" while Under Wraps' does – that to me is the most definitive proof that the EW source is correct, and Under Wraps is the first "official" DCOM. So this list needs to reflect that. (IMO, it also can't be ignored that Adventures in Babysitting isn't the "100th DCOM" if you count Northern Lights...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:42, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

←IJBall, you just restated what I say. My last post was in response to Perez's post that current Disney Channels management use of the brand could absolute negate previous brand use. Although, the EW article use the term "considers" in regards to Under Wraps DCOM status, that isn't absolute, giving the possibility of other earlier movies were DCOM but lost that brand or fuzzy in general. We also have to consider common understanding at WP, for example in naming articles. MTV News takes this up directly, even reporting regarding Northern's listing at this article, and the Sharpay's Fabulous Adventure DTV DCOM substitution. Vanity Fair places Northern as the first DCOM (lower case). Bustle (not aware of this site before) has it as coming out officially under the DCOM banner.

@Spshu: The MTV source you just added (which I think we should probably still use in any case) is disingenuous at best – it's not "some fans" that consider Under Wraps to be the "first DCOM" – it's Disney Channel itself! (I also notice that the 1997 "Boca Raton News" article that is quoted in the MTV story doesn't label the film as a "Disney Channel Original Movie" either.) It's also dangerously close to WP:CIRCULAR relying as it does on this very Wikipedia article... But, again, that source can be added as well to the note I'm going add for Northern Lights. But there is still nothing I've seen that indicates that Northern Lights was actually "branded" as a DCOM (by Disney, in 1997 – Bustle provides no evidence for this, and I wonder how many of these articles were relying on older versions of this article for calling NL a "DCOM"...). In any case, I intend to move it back, with the new note added, in the next few days. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

To be clear, if we can find a contemporary 1997 source calling Northern Lights a "Disney Channel Original Movie" (title case necessary?), that would probably justify leaving it in the DCOMs list (though still with a note of explanation required). Otherwise, I think it should be moved back (with an added note), based on what Disney is saying in 2016 (and the current lack of verification that Northern Lights actually was a branded "DCOM"). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:31, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

This uses the words "...Disney Channel's original movie "Northern Lights"..." but not in the sense of a "brand" title; the following LA Times review of the film doesn't use those words at all. Neither does the NY Times review of the film, nor the Entertainment Weekly review. I am still finding no contemporary sourcing that verifies that this was a "Disney Channel Original Movie" in the sense that it was branded as such... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

One point about Sharpay's Fabulous Adventure: Disney didn't just suddenly decide in 2016 that it was a "DCOM" – Disney was calling Sharpay's Fabulous Adventure a "DCOM" from Day #1! It's right there in the May 2011 press release for the film. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:14, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

A little late, but this commercial does call Northern Lights "a Disney Channel original movie", and this 2014 interview with actor and writer John Hoffman describes it as "the first Disney Channel Original Movie". Raymond1922 (talk) 21:08, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Several points here. First Disney itself is the one that gets to "decide" what "the first Disney Channel Original Movie" (actors/writers don't) and Disney has clearly settled on Under Wraps as being the "first" DCOM. Second, we include a 'note' that covers all this, so it hasn't been ignored. Third, while the ad does say "Disney Channel original movie" in the voice-over, they don't include on-screen "branding" to that effect in the ad (i.e. the words "Disney Channel Original Movie" never appear on screen). Ultimately, I think that's what puts Under Wraps over the top at the first DCOM – the poster art actually includes the words "Disney Channel Original Movie", whereas Northern Lights' does not. It's pretty clear from all of this that Northern Lights is basically the "proto"- or "prototypical"-DCOM – Disney was obviously moving in the direction of creating the "DCOM" label around this time, but didn't "formally" adopt it until Under Wraps. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2018

The Lizzie McGuire Movie is missing in the 2003 Category Of List Of Disney Channel Original Films Article. The movie was premiered on May 2, 2003. Fruitsbasket123456 (talk) 00:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

 Info This is because The Lizzie McGuire Movie was theatrically released – it was not a DCOM (i.e. it was not a "TV movie" originally aired on Disney Channel). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:32, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Protected

I have fully protected this page for two days. I see lots of reverting but I don't see any attempt by either side to come to the talk page and explain why they are adding/reverting. Lay out your reasoning here, please. Several of you, who have been here long enough to know better, are way over WP:3RR. Remember that edit warring is against the rules even when you think you are right. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Except for the part where I went to the editor's talk page, and requested they explain their changes here. Which they have refused to do. As per WP:BURDEN, the rest of us don't have to explain the added content – the "adder" does. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:52, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

I reverted content that was added that was not in WP:SCOPE of the article as specified by the article title and lead description of what the scope of the article is. Generally we try to restrict article content of all articles to the defined article scope. If the editor adding the out-of-scope content wants to extent the scope there needs to be a discussion and consensus to do so and likely the article title would need to change to reflect change. I would oppose changing the scope of this article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Disney Movies not on list

was stargirl a disney channel original? Mattchew2112 (talk) 23:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Just Like Mr. Sunny

This movie does not exist, it's an internet hoax, and sadly origin of it is Wikipedia, this IP edit specifically: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_Disney_Channel_original_films&diff=prev&oldid=297730358 Every other spread to the internet happened after that edit. As such I'm removing it from page.Tehonk (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

The 'Disney Channel Premiere Films' are tough, because that was back then Disney Channel was basically a "Pay TV" channel like HBO, so sourcing is extremely difficult to come by (i.e. no easy way to do WP:V on them!). Thus, it would not surprise me if that was not the only hoax listed, or if some of the listed airing dates weren't flat-out wrong for some of them. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Disney Channel Magazines are invaluable resources, they contain full schedules from these era. Some can be found on archive.org: https://archive.org/search.php?query=%22Disney%20Channel%20Magazine%22 There are quite a lot of from these era, although not so much from 1983. One of the uploaders said intents to upload more from 1983. And Bill Cotter's "The Wonderful World of Disney Television" book is also a masterpiece work: https://www.amazon.com/Wonderful-World-Disney-Television-Complete/dp/0786863595 And his supplemental materials that he sells separately here: https://www.billcotter.com/tvbook/supplemental.htm They basically combine everything even from these unfindable Disney Channel Magazine issues.Tehonk (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Disney Channel Premiere Films

IP editor is trying to trim this list down using [1], but fan clubs/fan sites are not considered reliable sources. If there are incorrect entries in that list, we will need a reliable source in order to verify that – something like the Disney Channel Magazines that are mentioned in the thread above this one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

D23 is a labeled as a fan club but it is owned and run by Disney. A bit different than fan sites owned and run by fans with no connection to the company. I would consider this an exception to the general rule of not using fan sites. Disney calls it a fan club but it is a Disney product run by Disney for the benefit of Disney fans. Content included is likely as reliable as any other content generated by Disney official outlets. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

OK, will self-revert on that basis, but I personally would rather see some other sourcing to confirm this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Geraldo Perez D23 should be considered reliable. And AFAIK these pages under the "Disney A to Z" section is prepared by Disney's Chief Archivist. So should be as reliable as it gets.Tehonk (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Strange Companions

It's currently listed with "February 28, 1987" date, while this is indeed the US premiere date, it was actually aired in Canada years before than that. In "December 4, 1983" [2]. How to note this in the page?Tehonk (talk) 00:35, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Tehonk: I would leave the U.S. air date there, but you can add a 'note' via the {{Refn}} template, which allows you to add a note with an inline source included. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

P.U.N.K.S. = DCOM

Because Disney says so - https://d23.com/a-to-z/p-u-n-k-s-television/

User:IJBall says this needs to be discussed, apparently they think facts need discussion. So, please discuss.

98.109.143.57 (talk) 22:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I would like it "fact checked" by a trusted editor – @Tehonk: do you have any comments or thoughts on this? Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for ping @IJBall:, hard to tell, kind of similar to Northern Lights, from what I can tell it was first released on video in January (and that 5 January date seems to be wrong, every contemporary source and video guide lists it with 12 January date) so, initially it had nothing to do with Disney. Disney later purchases rights to air it in fall, on September 4, 1999 (the date d23.com lists). Trying to find out if it was labeled as DCOM at that time. But question is, even if it was labeled as such in September premiere, it was first made for video and had nothing to do with Disney after all, should it be called a DCOM then? Tehonk (talk) 08:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

My general thought is – if it was not included in Disney's "official list" of "100 DCOMs" from 2016, then it's not a DCOM. IMDb also lists no involvement from Disney or a Disney company, and does not list it as a "TV movie". At best, it might belong under 'Notable non-Disney Channel Original Movie films' along with 16 Wishes and Harriet The Spy: Blog Wars (which also have pages at D23), but I'd want to see at least one other source on this to confirm it. But I agree with you, this is not a DCOM – it looks like D23 got this wrong (which has been my concern with this fansite the whole time: I was wondering if there were errrors...). So my vote is that it stays out of the main list. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:14, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Zombies 3

So, Zombies 3 is now set to be a Disney+ Original Movie coming Friday, July 15.

However, it's also airing on Disney Channel on Friday, August 12. This is the first time this has happened where a movie streams on Disney+ FIRST and on Disney Channel later, it's usually the other way around.

My question is, do we leave Zombies 3 on the List of Disney Channel original films page or just move it to the List of Disney+ original films page?

Peacerocker07 (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

It will come down to what WP:RS call the film from here on in – If they keep calling it a "Disney Channel Original Film", it stays here. But if they start calling it a "Disney+ Original Film", then it should be removed from this list. Based on the EW article, it's looking like it should be pulled from this list. But lets see what other RS say after this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:55, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I could see the poster as not being clear enough but it does call it an Original movie in the same manner it does on Chip n Dale and Turning Red's posters CreecregofLife (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

How about this?

If the encore presentation or even the streaming release says "A Disney Channel Original Movie" at the beginning, maybe it could stay on the List of Disney Channel original films? That's the only other way I could think of it staying. Peacerocker07 (talk) 03:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

This I agree with. Though I wouldn't bet on it saying such, because of how relatively little it takes to change it. CreecregofLife (talk) 03:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Again, I'd like to see other WP:RSs and what they say on this. Or an official press release from Disney. Either way, it cannot be totally confirmed yet that this won't be branded a "Disney Channel Original Film", or perhaps a combination of both. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

It's been a while. But Disney+ literally promotes it everywhere as their own original movie, Disney Channel doesn't anymore. We will see what happens during the encore presentation on August 12, though. I wonder if it will still say "A Disney Channel Original Movie" at the beginning since it's kinda a different version of the movie that's extended with an extra song... this is kind of confusing, but I hope we figure it out in the end. Does it stay on the List of Disney Channel original films even if it's not like, promoted as a DCOM for its Disney Channel premiere? Peacerocker07 (talk) 03:50, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

What it says in the credits is what we're waiting for. We're still 2 weeks from premiere so of course it's "been a while". We're still waiting and still have to wait--CreecregofLife (talk) 03:53, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I think Zombies 3 can stay in the List of Disney Channel original films.

I just watched it on Disney+ and while it said "A Disney Original Movie" (not specifically Disney+ or Disney Channel), the end credits had the 2019 Disney Channel Original Movie logo at the end after the Resonate Entertainment logo. So, I think it still technically counts?

You guys can be the judge of that. Peacerocker07 (talk) 08:57, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

I found another source, kind of. The official Disney Branded Television August 2022 Programming Highlights are labelling it as

"Disney Channel Original Movie – Premiere on Disney Channel

ZOMBIES 3 – Special “Lost Song” Version (8:00-9:35 p.m. EDT)"

I still think this is good enough to keep on this page after the TV premiere. Peacerocker07 (talk) 01:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I want to see how it's branded when it airs in August. But I suspect it will be branded as a DCOM then. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:50, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

References

DCOMs on Disney+

Moved from User talk:IJBall § DCOM on Disney+

 – --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

IJBall: It may not matter to you whether you're from the United States or not, but it's impossible to add Disney+ in a single sentence to the DCOM page. If you've been updated with the news of Disney shutting down majority global Disney linear TV channels to focus solely on their specific launches of Disney+ there, you'll understand the change(s) I've made. What's more, since Disney+ launched, I can hardly recall any DCOM being released on DVD/Blu-ray. If you disagree with the changes and like I stated on my last edit summary, please reply to me the "lots wrong" I've made/done. Also, the DCOM page apart from the DCOM list from 1997 till date looks outdated. Intrisit (talk) 10:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Multiple points:

1. Only what happens in the U.S. matters here – this article is about DCOMs which are produced for the American Disney Channel; what happens internationally is not in the WP:SCOPE of this article.
2. Whatever is added about Disney+ actually needs to be sourced.
3. Whatever is added will likely be short – one sentence stating that all DCOMs since Spin(?) or Under Wraps(?) have been roughly simultaneously released on Disney+ and broadcast on the Disney Channel. And then maybe a sentence on no DCOMs being released on home media over the same period (though that would actually need to be secondarily sourced to something).
4. I was very clear about the "something wrong" – you keep changing reference dates and authors to the wrong format for the article – please stop doing this: the current refs at the article are fine and do not need to be "improved" or changed.

Now are there actually any secondary sources for the changes you want to make? Why don't you post a draft sentence or paragraph (with sources) here to the Talk page of what you want so we can all see what you're proposing? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@IJBall: What happened to WP:CSB?! Funny, the secondary sourcing confuses me, because without the "quote" in {{cite web}}, the sources I'll quote have/get no meaning — no wonder you're disagreeing with the changes I've made.

My proposal outside of the change of dmy dates change is; I added the "High School Musical" franchise along with the Zombies, Zenon, Teen Beach, Camp Rock and Twitches sequels/trilogies to the major DCOM franchises because they deserve a mention. The sources are there on their individual pages; I admit not duplicating them here so you'll see I'm not just modifying this to make points. Maybe they don't get special mentions than what's on the page right now in length there in the U.S..

I'm confused right now whether or not to touch this page, because sources out there can't pinpoint prove my points, so you'll disagree and revert them. Intrisit (talk) 10:33, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

You keep bringing up WP:CSB which is a canard in this case – the first sentence of this article is "Many television films have been produced for Disney Channel, an American family-oriented basic cable channel and former premium television channel..." which clearly defines the article's WP:SCOPE as being DCOMs produced for the American Disney Channel. Other countries are mostly irrelevant to this discussion, and if you are actually proposing changing the WP:SCOPE of this article, I promise you I won't be the only one who opposes it.

There is also zero justification for changing either the article's reference author or date formats (which would entail changing over 100 sources), the latter as per WP:DATETIES, and again I strongly oppose doing this here, or at any article, as per WP:CITESTYLE and WP:CITEVAR.

Yes, the thing about addition of the the "simultaneous release" of DCOMs on Disney Channel and Disney+ should be sourced (preferentially secondarily sourced) to something. Ditto the lack of DVD releases of DCOMs by Disney lately.

On your final point, if you want to change the "franchise" sentence in the lede to: "Aside from the High School Musical films, the major DCOM franchises include Camp Rock, The Cheetah Girls, Twitches, Halloweentown, the Teen Beach films, the Zenon trilogy, and the Descendants series., and possibly add Zombies to the end of this list, I would have no objection to that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

|author=

IJBall reverted my edit for an improper use of 'author' parameter in a Twitter-specific citation template. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 23:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Reversion was totally justified: [3] – as per template docs, |author= parameter is for "Author's real name, if known. If not known, then the tweet is probably not an acceptable usage of a self-published source (see WP:SPS)" – IOW, that parameter is only to be used if it's an actual person. You were attempting to add a "non-person" as author, which you are not supposed to do: the |user= is wholly sufficient for these press release posts. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

But what is "author's real name"? Achmad Rachmani (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The real name of the person – i.e. "John Doe" or "Achmad Rachmani", not "staff report" or "Disney Branded TV PR" (which is an organization, not a "person"). In other words, some cites, including tweets, will not have the need of an |author= parameter. The cites you tried to change at this article don't need an |author= filled in. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Black Arrow Missing

Hi, why is Black Arrow film not listed? The D23 site says it's the 4th film. The lists on this website were compiled by the Chief Archivist which makes them the authority. For that matter, this list falsely suggests numerous films are Disney Channel Premiere films. Escape to Witch Mountain, Susie Q, Wish Upon a Star, The Paper Brigade, and Northern Lights are not listed on the D23 site. Once again, this list is the official Disney list prepared by their chief archivist. There should not be any arguing over this. These films have been removed in the past and should not have returned.

Disney also owns and operates D23.com, but that is still irrelevant since the lists were done by their archives.

https://d23.com/a-to-z/disney-channel-premiere-films/ 72.135.55.191 (talk) 11:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

It would be best to get a secondary source mention of this film, especially as the Black Arrow (1985 film) article is entirely unsourced. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:54, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, Northern Lights is definitely mentioned on the D23 site [4] – the issue is that it's not a true "DCOM" for all of the reasons previously discussed, and included in its note.

Escape to Witch Mountain (1995 film) appears to be an ABC TV movie and should be removed from the list.

The Paper Brigade is sourced, though it looks like a direct-to-video film, so it's arguable that it should be included.

Susie Q (film) and Wish Upon a Star use the same source, but both became famous from Disney Channel airings, and I feel strongly that they should be included here, though you could argue that they should be moved to the 'Notable non-Disney Channel Original Movie films' section, along with 16 Wishes, etc. which are pretty much in the same category. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Prom Pact

The Disney+ Original Movie, Prom Pact was just announced to be premiering on March 30, 2022 on Disney Channel, followed by the Disney+ release the very next day.

Should it be included in the List of Disney Channel original films? Peacerocker07 (talk) 18:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

If it premieres first on Disney Channel then, yes, it should be listed here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:37, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

References

“Disney Original Movie” Branding

A lot of movies premiering simultaneously on Disney Channel and Disney+ are now under the “Disney Original Movie” branding. No “channel” or “+” in between.

It makes it confusing for those who analyze the Disney Channel Original Movies a lot.

Should these "Disney Original Movies" still be counted and listed in the List of Disney Channel original films page?

Zombies 3 and Prom Pact are prime examples of this. Cqntralls (talk) 04:08, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

So starting a new, separate section for these? – How many of these are there so far? I don't think I'd support a new section for these unless they have been at least about five of them. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I’m not suggesting a new section, but just wondering if these movies should even count as “Disney Channel Original Movies”. Cqntralls (talk) 04:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I think they count as a "very-related category", yes. And a separate section is likely the way to handle it, in the same way that the pre-DCOMs are handled at this same article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

@Peacerocker07: Do you know how many of these movies have had (near-)simultaneous releases on Disney Channel and Disney+? And do you know how many have been branded as "Disney Original Movies" (as opposed to "Disney Channel Original Movies")? Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:38, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

So far, only Zombies 3 and Prom Pact are the only ones that have been branded as "Disney Original Movies". The upcoming film, The Slumber Party was announced as such too.

We'll see what happens in the next few months-years when we get more updates on Big City Greens: The Movie, From the Desk of Zoe Washington, and The Naughty Nine. Cqntralls (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi! They Prom Pact and The Slumber Party are "Disney Original Movies" without "channel". Though yes, they premiered on Disney Channel first. I don't have a login, but you can check my IP address and google the location for credibility. 204.128.192.31 (talk) 18:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

References