Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legends of Bikini Bottom


 * 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. Both delete and keep !votes are merely assertions without any substance. v/r - TP 22:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Legends of Bikini Bottom

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Clearly non-notable. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  07:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy delete Yeah I agree. Clearly not notoble. Qantasplanes (Let's disscuss it!) 09:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - The automatically created google news search above indicates that it is notable. "Clearly" seems to be the deletion rational.  Pretty weak. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 02:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I must fully agree with User:Peregrine Fisher, if its references you want just search the web you find countless ones, heres a potential one.
 * Keep. notoble.  stop with the spongebob fetish.  help me write an article about Johanness De Peyster, mayor of new york city from 1698-99.  seriously.  your brain will unmushify from thinking about something other than cartoon.--Milowent • hasspoken  06:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Spongebob Squarepants, as the article does not at present assert any notability through in depth coverage in reliable sources, as required by our notability guidelines. I've done a decent search through Google/News to see if anything existed but could find nothing significant. The example provided, this, is not an in-depth review by any means. It is true that the onus is on those who advocate deletion or redirection/merging to explain why it should be so, and I believe I have done that, it is equally important for those advocating keeping the article to detail why, and this is in my opinion yet to be done, so please show some in-depth reviews or coverage. Thanks, Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  03:28, 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.