This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

TelevisionLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles abouttelevision programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you canjoin the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to thestyle guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. DisneyMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofThe Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale.

This page isnot a forum for general discussion aboutCory in the House. Any such commentsmay be removed orrefactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions aboutCory in the House at theReference desk.

When they call it a 'spin off,' they really mean 'a continuation of the same show with different characters and situations.' What I mean by this is that it's the same format: in That's so Raven, it was 2 girls and 1 guy hanging out and getting into outrageous situations with unfunny jokes (well i liked that's so raven's, but this other show is tarded). In the first raven did really weird things to get laughs, cory does the same. Instead of the side story being about the main character's younger sibling, it's the president's daughter, or the parents (like in that's so raven).

But it's dumb b/c the mom is gone for some reason (i don't watch it that often) and Raven is never heard of. Neither are eddie and raven's third friend, which is unrealistic. I talk to my sister and the kids from her class all the time and they graduated and are in college too.

Furthermore, in Raven, Chelsea (remembered her name :) is a dumb friend and Eddie is a smart friend. In this, the dude is dumb (same as raven, the same sex is the stupid one) and the other friend (opposite sex) is smart(ish). Also, from what I've seen when they play in their band, it's extremely obvious that they aren't playing. They should try to make it look real.

And my last observance is how unrealistic the situation is. A very unfamous chef from California gets hired to work for the president, and sees him almost regularly, and has a daughter that (in the episode I saw) going all over the white house, being in the oval office and such. just an observance. --208.71.219.140 (talk)23:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Disney, it's designed for Children, it isn't suppose to be realistic. Children aren't that all technical, a majourity of disney shows are designed for a young pre-treen audience. So you're look at like maybe 8-12? Plus, i watch that show and I'm 16. I don't sit there, and younger children certinaly don't sit there and analyse a t.v show for being realistic and I actually think it is realisitc. This type of Spin-off is based on the premisis of when a supporting character or characters in an existing series are given their own show in which they become the main focus. The original series continues without them and there may be some crossover of characters between the shows on occasion.

Of course, in this case "That's so raven" didn't continue, a better example would be "Angel" from "Buffy the vampire slayer". Corey in the house has the exact same premisis of that's so Raven, whcih you have pointed out.

If you watched the That's so Raven series, you'll see the mum is studying in England, and Raven jsut graduated Hgih School, meaning she's off to College...Or university (whatever you americans call it). So that naturally leaves Victor and Cory, the president comes to town and (you'll see with presidents when they visit major cities they visit the "hot spot" and in this universe, The Chil Grill is the hot-spot, so it is actually likely the president would go there, this president Martinez, is very excentric, so you can actually see him hiring this random chef for his amazing cooking. The obvious reason for a spin-off is when people enjoyed the show, so they didn't want to change the premisis, so they kept the main character with the odd quirk (raven is pshycic and corey is money greedy) and there is the two friends, most t.v shows have a minor character they can give stories too, in this case "sophie" this gives them the ability to fill out epsidoes if their under time. oh and the president does have his own chef who resides in the white house. it's much like the shower "suite life on deck" all the possible adventures and episodes have been exploited. with a new show they can add new characters and add new episodes based on the new setting. But in all honesty, it actually seems very realisitc. A spin off is exactly as you said "a continuation of the same show with different characters and situations." they just use Minor characters from the series to make a new one.—Precedingunsigned comment added by58.111.182.107 (talk)13:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think we need the fake promo picture, its not even real, its just pictures off google putted into one whole picture.

is it?

DUHHHH! y do u think it was on Disney 365?--Cutie 4 life22:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He asked it before it was on Disney 365...--Ac1983fan^{(yell at me)}19:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada, we have both Disney 365 and Disney 411. They are pretty much the same but 411 is canadian.207.6.204.135 (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2010 (UTC)-CBeveridge-207.6.204.135 (talk)03:20, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article notes that the theme song can be heard on Disney Channel's website but all I hear are (very short) samples...I think we need to edit that unless somebody can post a link.72.229.142.17700:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should we put something in about its simirality toThe Fresh Prince of Bel Air?Hshiwani13:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other than a rap theme song and the main character moving to the other side of the country, if there are more similarities, I'd be in favor of it.WAVY 1001:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How ishannah montana top rated.Suite Life Of Zack and Cody is way better. AndCory in the house cant be number two.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117957517.html?categoryid=14&cs=1]Click on dis link, it says Cory in the House is the most-watched DCOS beating Hannah Montana and The Suite Life of Zack and Cody.

Please get your facts correct. It was only most watched for the Series premiere.Switchfo0t81318:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Hannah Montana is WAYYYY better then both TSLOZAC and CITH.

I searched the list of That's So Raven Episodes AND Corey in the House Episodes and I saw no episodes titled as such so I think the spin off line aught to be removed.Timekeeper01:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia is, by in large, something to be avoided. Much of it can be folded into the article, and if it can't we should think hard if it's notable. I've merged the trivia in the production notes, and pulled out the TSR guest star notes. Theonly line in that whole section that wasn't a rumor was uncited. Please try and link articles to what you put in, folks :) We're doing good here! --Ipstenu(talk|contribs)14:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone, anyone, provide a citation for the ep with Raven, Eddie and Tanya? I can't find the ep listed anywhere but here, and no one's yet been able to pull in sources. --Ipstenu(talk|contribs)18:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will someone please stop moving the picture of the main characters from characters to production, Since it is a picture of the main characters, it should be in characters!216.54.173.17122:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"In this universe Richard Martinez is thepresident, and in his first term. The show must be set in present time, asThat's so Raven was. In one episode Victor mentions several previous presidents includingBill Clinton, which means that real U.S. history ran its course until the2000 Presidential Election in November. It is unknown ifGeorge W. Bush exists in this universe, but if he did he either served only one term, or lost re-election to Martinez, making this fictional president aDemocrat.

However, in this series Richard Martinez has just won re-election, providing a signifigant goof if the year really is2007, or either changing the show's time to2008 or2004."

If he's a Democrat, where did John Kerry go?

198.85.73.1218:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's Disney. It's a TV show. Who knows. --Ipstenu(talk|contribs)18:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you need to explain more about the charactars, like John D'Aquino: "The President of the United States of America". You can do better then that! "He acts the president of the united states of america, who sometimes is BRILLIANT yet is sometimes just dim-witted. He is a father figure for Cory and often wishes he could just go out like a regular person. He's serious when the occassion needs it, but still has a lot of kid left in him. It is revealed that his hobby is "bird-calling". What do you thinkHappykid53623:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV.Com, a rather reliable source, keeps pulling that episode off their CitH page. Theepisode page is still there, but theepisode list page no longer lists it. It's supposed to air on the 18th, if at all, so I think we should err on the side of cation and not add it until it airs. Disney's been playing merry cob with their schedules. --Ipstenu(talk|contribs)13:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to remove this from the "crossovers" section, as it does not seem to be one, but a character intro, and would prefer prior permission.Goodone12122:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm yea did anybody notive this in the opening paragraph about the main character being a negro. That seems a little out of line. I know it's BAD, but it's politically correct either.— Precedingunsigned comment added by63.232.22.50 (talk)

We call that vandalism and it's been reverted. If you see things like that, you too can edit the page and fix it :) --Ipstenu(talk •contribs)19:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is negro bad or politically incorrect. Black is less politically correct and not all "negroes" are from Africa leaving out African-Americans and colored is too vague.—Precedingunsigned comment added by71.183.68.197 (talk)23:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? It's common knowledge that "black" is the most politically correct term and "negro" is actially considered incredibly offensive.Tidus mi2 (talk)12:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, is spanish, negro is black, and is Cory black? Yes! so negro is technically correct —Precedingunsigned comment added by99.162.106.111 (talk)04:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IThink that the Samantha Samuels Character link shouldn't be a Redirect to the Cory in the house article again.
Nicky Nouse23:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, someone change it! People, there is a problem with this!!!Nicky Nouse14:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to redirect toList of Cory in the House characters#Samantha_Samuels --NrDg15:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussionhere about whether or not the articles on the individul episodes of this series follow guidelines and policies, and therefore warrant their own articles. This is not an attack on the show, it just means that for whatever reason, this series was chosen to be evaluated now. You are invited to comment at the discussion. You also may wish to refresh your memories on the policies and guidelines onnotability,verifiability andreliable sources.I  ^(said)(did)22:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the trivia section, it says:In Cory in the House, Cory is in the 8th Grade and in the beginning of That's So Raven Raven is also in the 8th Grade.I didn't want to erase it if that were true, but I think she was in the 9th grade when she started cuz she was 14 when she was starting out, and Cory moved up from Elementry (or Grade) School to Junior High in some of the episodes from the last season (which brings on the next question). The Juicer said "We're gonna have alot of fun for the nextthree years in the episode "Juicer Consequences", yet when he moves to Washington D.C., he is in the 8th Grade. O_o Any answers to this? XDZSoraz01:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think he says that because in That's So Raven it is stated that he got held back. He probably thinks Middle school is three years or so.—Precedingunsigned comment added by68.252.225.206 (talk)21:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should something be added about the links between this show and theHoward Stern universe? I speak of at least two events that I have noticed: the curse-breaking incantation in 1x09 "Bahavian Idol" where Cory makes the fake incantation of "In-a-gadda-da-vidababa booey baba booey", and in 1x15 "Air Force One Too Many" which stars Stern alumGeorge Takei. I have missed quite a few episodes so I am sure there are links/references that I may have missed. This may just be a simple case of the writers/producers, maybe even cast being fans of the Stern show, but either way it seems to be an intentional link between two wildly different shows/universes. Seems worth a mention in trivia at the very least. =)

Which means what? Trivia sections are discouraged at Wikipedia. The Takei casting choice could have simply been the fact that one of the producers remembered him fromthe only good Star Trek there was for all we know. And if it's because the writers/producers are fans, I wouldn't put it in.WAVY 1019:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article currently has a Trivia section, and otherwise, if it is a prevalent theme throughout the series, it may warrant an inclusion. Like I said I can't be too sure for having not seen many of the episodes, but I've noticed those two links at the least, and I wouldn't doubt there to be more. I'm mentioning it here in the thought that someone might be able to list some other links and maybe gauge the relevance of inclusion. -- I would agree that those two simple links I listed wouldn't be worth much more than trivia, but if it IS prevalent throughout... I'm repeating here but hopefully you get the gist.71.153.49.21304:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I started a trivia column about two months ago and people have been deleting it constantly. It's not like there is anything wrong with it, it just needs a little clean up. I know trivia sections are discouraged but there is not to much wrong with it.

Here me out, PLEASE DO NOT DELETE IT!

That is all.—Precedingunsigned comment added by68.252.246.23 (talk)22:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Think of trivia as a list of unorganized facts that should be in the article somewhere. The goal is to eventually organize the information and put it in the article. As such trivia sections are temporarily permitted but should eventually go away. SeeWP:TRIVIA for a better discussion. Some trivia is too trivial to ever be in the article, so it shouldn't be in a trivia section either and should be removed (judgment call). Editors should leave trivia sections alone for a while and not remove them immediately but a good article won't have them. --NrDg22:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the first user.—Precedingunsigned comment added by67.39.176.87 (talk)22:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So why don't they get rid of the bad ones? Trivia isn't bad it can be helpful and interesting. Arn't those two what wikipedia stands for?

As stated above, the goal is to organize them and put them in an article. If a trivia is something "helpful and interesting," you can incorporate those trivia inside an article.TJ Reyes04:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the first user AND the second user.

As do I.

Please put it back.

—Precedingunsigned comment added by68.252.243.253 (talk)00:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CoryInTheHouseTitleCard.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is noexplanation or rationale as to why its use inthis Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to theboilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent withfair use.

Please go tothe image description page and edit it to include afair use rationale. Using one of the templates atWikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk)18:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The YouTube footnote seems fake, and there is no season 3. Please someone fix this121.54.32.56 (talk)14:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

How come there's no mention of the show ending? I'd think that a significant part in this article.--Valkyrie Red (talk)04:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the section about the Writer's Strike removed? --Austin Robinson 04:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)User:Robinsonbecky

cory in the house has become a popular meme so the article should include mention of cory's rise to memedom?71.30.34.68 (talk)23:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)Ethan July 10 2017[reply]

Unless this is picked up by multiple reliable sources as being something of note, this is just fannish trivia.Geraldo Perez (talk)17:54, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Right. There are countless articles promotingShrek as a meme, and while this does seem to be a prevalent meme online, if there's no sources than the administration will see no use in including such information in the article. If the production team of the show acknowledged this however, then I think it'd be quite relevant. --AlexanderHovanec (talk)05:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In recent months I have been seeing this show being called "the greatest anime of all time". That is completely false. The show is a live action sitcom made in America not from Japan. Same could be said withLazyTown,Shrek,Johnny Test,The Nutshack, andBee Movie. Do you guys not know what animes are?MechMaster Katzenstein (talk)02:31, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any edits to this article classifying this show as anime is deliberate misinformation vandalism and should be treated as such and the editor adding it warned about vandalism edits. This may also be considered a deliberate insult to the lead actor with potential racist overtones based on names similar to anime as applied to him.Geraldo Perez (talk)02:46, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually both of you are wrong... sure it's vandalism but 1. they're not confusing live action productions or American productions with anime, they're deliberately deeming it as an anime because 2. it's a joke. It doesn't have racist undertones nor is any type of offense intended. This is what is known as a "meme" and anyone even moderately associated with the internet or any type of media should be able to realize both 1. and 2. This is "meme" culture, the type of humor millennials are into. I shouldn't have to explain this type of humor to anyone, but the point is deeming an American Disney show as two dimensional Japanese production -- the humor being that this isn't true. It's outrageous and almost random. If anything, I can almost see legitimate information being entered into the article regarding its position as a "meme", just as has been done to the Shrek franchise's Wikipedia. As long as there are sources. The only reason this hasn't been included in the article is because there aren't enough sources to cover it. After all, the joke seems to be fizzling out in the media, and therefore doesn't have enough of an impact for Wikipedia. --AlexanderHovanec (talk)05:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Jokes have no place on Wikipedia in this regard. It is deliberate misinformation and vandalism no matter how it's looked at.Amaury (talk |contribs)05:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, of course we can't play the meme straight here. However, could we address the meme's existence somewhere in the article?73.157.115.95 (talk)15:41, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, lame jokes like that just get ignored on Wikipedia. So it's very, very unlikely.Ravensfire (talk)17:16, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about referencing the in a section titled "In popular culture"?Stein256 (talk)04:23, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there's solid references, perhaps. I'm sure there are tabloid-ish clickbait crap articles that mention it, but really should be from decent publications. It's not widespread as far as I can tell, so borderline worth including.Ravensfire (talk)17:13, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Start-Class television articles
• Low-importance television articles
• WikiProject Television articles
• Start-Class Disney articles
• Mid-importance Disney articles
• Start-Class Disney articles of Mid-importance
• WikiProject Disney articles