Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squidward Tentacles (character)


 * 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   keep.  kur  ykh   02:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Squidward Tentacles (character)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is crufty with no third-party sources, and is redundant since the character already has its own section on the SBSP character page. sixty nine  • speak, I say •  01:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Agreed; it fits quite nicely into the SBSP list, so if any information is lacking in it, then it can be merged from that article.  Im per a t § r (Talk) 03:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete because I hate Spongebob. No, seriously, because there's not enough out of universe info and the main character list alreasdy covers him enough. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Hobit. Article is a wreck, but a little tentacle elbow grease will get it in order in time given the sources shown below. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Gosh golly, I think the character is sourceable.
 * We've got coverage in scholarly books, ,.
 * We've got him in an article on "the worker's plight"
 * A brief description
 * Movie Reviews. Lots and lots of movie reviews where the character is at least briefly described.
 * And just plain reviews. In Time  and other places ,
 * Seriously. This was the #1 kids show in the country.  There are ~90 book hits, 386 news hits, (13 in the last month!).  And I hear he's in Entertainment Weekly's ""24 TV Characters Who Just Turn You Off." .  Iconic and sourceable. Hobit (talk) 17:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Further comment The article as it stands is horrible. But the topic has no problem with the GNG.  Hobit (talk) 17:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep An undoubtedly awful article. The sources already in the article and the ones listed above establish that the character has independent notability to merit a standalone article. Beyond that, the description that the article is described as "crufty" in and of itself ought to be the best argument for retention. Need for improvement has nothing to do with deletion. Alansohn (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep based on the numerous sources found by Hobit. Edward321 (talk) 23:57, 27 October 2008 (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.