Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krusty Krab


 * 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 for an outright deletion. Participants are encouraged to head for the article's talk page for a improvement or merge discussion. - Mailer Diablo 18:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Krusty Krab

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Only six sources. Not enough sources to prove notable. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  12:18, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Although this is undoubtedly an important aspect of the SpongeBob SquarePants television show, all of the sources provided appear to be in-universe with no real-world commentary. See WP:INUNIVERSE. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Undoubtily a key part of the cartoon, this article is well written and informative, giving a detailed and accurate description of the fictional resuraunt, I will hunt for more references. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 17:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Obviously notable. Nominator should go read some policy and guideline pages and not waste our time. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to a List of locations in Sponge Bob Square Pants or some such. Jclemens (talk) 04:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Lack of sources is not a valid deletion criteria. Go add some instead of starting a deletion discussion. Google throws up a lot of references to this. Mo ainm  ~Talk  18:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Upmerge now that I trimmed the article to remove all the extreme WP:CRUFT (41 kB!!!). Stubby without established WP:NOTABILITY, so not deserving of its own article per WP:SPINOUT. – sgeureka t•c 08:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Obviously deserves it's own article. CallawayRox (talk) 17:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How is it notable outside of the TV show? - The Bushranger One ping only 02:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This is a good article and is very important and informitive. It should definately not be deleted.Yellow1996 (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How is it important? WP:ITSUSEFUL is not a reason to keep. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: "Only six sources. Not enough sources to prove notable."  You're not doing it right.  Tell us why its not notable, tell us what WP:BEFORE yields.  It could be notable with no sources currently cited.  Its clearly part of a notable series.  Will the project be improved by deletion of one of the many articles about this horrid cartoon?--Milowent • hasspoken  05:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a possible expanded version of SpongeBob_SquarePants or to another article, like Jclemens has suggested. Many above have opined that the article is notable, but have not detailed how the article at present meets the general notability guideline with references that demonstrate significant coverage in reliable sources. It has been said that these sources exist, but none have been presented and doing a decent and broad search through Google/News/Books I came up with nothing, so if they exist please present them.I would like to see some. At present, the article is written primarialy from an in-universe perspective. I'll also note that there is precedent for merging in this instance, as indeed the article on Bikini Bottom was also merged at it's AFD in 2008. I'd encourage some of the !voters here to read over Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and reconsider their opinions here. Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  03:12, 30 October 2011 (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.