Talk:SpongeBob SquarePants

Peer Review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • is considered
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]

Do you have a source? -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 22:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I found that comment a load of bunk.... I dont even think SpongeBob was there in 1996... 71.238.25.226 (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

SpongeBob was born in 1986. -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 19:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Really? Mokoniki | talk 17:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Where did you get that info? Multimusiclover1 (talk) 17:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

As seen on his driver's license in the episodes "No Free Rides" and "Sleepy Time." -AMK152^{(t • c)} 22:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

that is a great show —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poopsmithbob1 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Isnt the Bikini Atoll in the Pacific Ocean and not Atlantic?Kongkit (talk) 22:33, 1 February 2010 (UTC)KongkitKongkit (talk) 22:33, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Who is Bobson?

There is a reference to a "Bobson" (no first name) in the second paragraph of the section titled, Development (1993 – 1999). There is no other reference to Bobson in the article. It appears that the sentence is really about Hillenburg. Gbl2233 (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Year of the Sponge

In 2009, Nickelodeon UK launched the"Year of the Sponge", a year long event that runs in tandem to the 10th birthday celebrations of Spongebob in the USA. A new website was launched to support this event on February 4th, [1]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickelodeon UK (talk • contribs) 19:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply From SpongeBob.com-you have been very great to tell us such many things thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.183.177 (talk) 02:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible Political Stance?

This might be just me, but it seems that the new episode Shuffleboarding portrays the Patriot Act... Although this might just be my speculation. 71.238.25.226 (talk) 22:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

How? -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 19:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

..."opened the door to many other cartoons to use more "adult" senses of humor and come from smaller companies"?

Jay Ward's Rocky and Bullwinkle Show (Jay Ward Productions) opened that door in 1959. Their Wikipedia article's opening paragraph says as much.

Yes, a lot of the development section is unsourced opinion and original research and needs a serious rewrite. Go ahead and remove anything unsourced you believe is inaccurate. --Bill ^{(talk|contribs)}

Someone else will have to edit out the section that caught my attention; this is a protected article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.18.233.109 (talk)

Ah I see. I will try to fix up the section. --Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Billy West

Remove the text: "Billy West: King Neptune ("SpongeBob vs. the Patty Gadget")" and replace it with nothing.

Billy West did not voice King Neptune in SpongeBob vs. The Patty Gadget. If you check the credits for the episode, it is Paul Tibbitt. Can someone please remove it? Dstrash (talk) 21:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Dstrash (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Is the Cast Order Wrong?

The cast is listed in alphabetical order. What is the correct order of showing the cast? I thought that it is listed in order of who gets paid the most (with the highest-paid cast member first, then second-highest, etc.), but I could be wrong. 98.202.38.225 (talk) 15:46, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Reply-Cast Order has not been wrong in a long time you are the wrong one you are not very succsesful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.183.177 (talk) 02:37, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

DVD Release

In a section DVD Release and Broadcasting, the sections not encyclopaedic. Please, delete (only the sections). Buchardo (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

How is it not encyclopaedic? -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 19:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Fix this page please

Can someone who has the rights please fix this page. It is currently blank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.42.121.131 (talk) 01:53, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I did… -99.255.188.158 (talk) 04:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Broadcasting

I think what the section Broadcasting is publicity and not encyclopedic. Delete!. --Buchardo (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

How is it not encyclopaedic? -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 19:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Spanish

Why having in wikipedia in spanish. --Buchardo (talk) 20:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

So those who speak Spanish can read in their own language. -AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 19:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with sponge bob and is not correct. someone please delete it, it bugs me.--RIVER 01:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rio44 (talk • contribs)

Decline in Quality

There are no viable sources to back up the claims that a decline in quality has occurred. The only source used was on a lesser known forum post. If not for the fact that it doesn't have any sources, it is biased. Also, if it NEEDS to stay on the page, at least put it in a correct section. Otherwise it looks like vandalism. Citations are needed in order to have claims be made on Wikipedia. I would fix it but for some reason it is a protected page. It shouldn't even belong anyway because it is not encyclopediac.

The paragraph that starts with "one critic says" needs to be removed. It has got to be the most useless, boring paragraph I have ever read and offered no information or insight at all. I would delete it if I could, but I can't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluepanda (talk • contribs) 14:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I changed the "one critis says" section a bit so it actually has a point. Maybe it still is in need of some polishing up, but I think it's better now.Pittsfordljb (talk) 17:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Can someone please bring back the section with Spongebob's decline in quality? This is not bias. It is only the statement of an audience. If this is considered biase, movie reviews and critiques would be considered biase too. I think this decline is an overlooked issue. Many fans have reached a consensus that the show has become less funny following Stephen Hillenburg's resignation. Need sources? Check out IMDB's forums.Booksrule9 (talk) 06:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It's considered biased because there was only one source. Here on Wikipedia, we consider sources reaching notability and verifiability, not popular opinion unless sourced. BOVINEBOY2008 13:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Add a picture of him! If the reason it was biased is because there was only one source, then can I substantiate the "Decline in Quality" section by providing more sources? I have no intention of disputing your claim. However, I believe I can prove that SpongeBob SquarePants decline in quality is notable and verifiable. Sources: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/6/bringbacktheoldspongebob http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/better-episodes-for-spongebob-squarepants http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/133754890?p=1 http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2006/05/medieval-spongebob.html http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=218185 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/thread/143620008 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/142643160?p=1 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/141586205?p=1 Do not all these opinions make this claim notable? Do they not make this claim verifiable? Am I correct to define bias a tendency to be one sided? Since there is praise in this article, should there not be criticism to "balance" the viewpoints? How can one deny the large presence of these opinions? If opinions are shown to be representative of an audience, doesn't it make the decline in quality a valid viewpoint? I stand by my argument that SpongeBob SquarePant's decline in quality is not biased and is an accurate statement of SpongeBob's current state of production.booksrule9 (talk) 04:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

None of those sources are acceptable per WP:RS. --Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 07:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Most of those are forums, 2 are petitions and 1 is a blog. Fortunately wikipedia doesn't accept those as reliable sources because anyone can say anything they want about any subject. And a number of people on a forum does not equal everyone who watches the show. If any of these things are mentioned in a news article written by a reliable source then it can be added, but until then we can only use the source we have. Dark verdant (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the show has dropped in quality too. I mean, now the episodes are things only a little kid coukd like, while older episodes (which i loved) were more clever, original, and great. Also, spongebob became way dumber in season 4, right? He was dumb in seasons 1-3, but he was smarter than he is today. This is my opinion, but does anybody agree? I think the article should mention this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.100.129 (talk) 15:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

This article should definitely include SpongeBob's decline in quality. Unfortunately, it appears the voice of fans is simply not enough to get that onto this article. To be honest, I'm quite annoyed that critics haven't picked up on this issue, since only the voice of a notable source can determine Wikipedia's content. The sad truth is that SpongeBob has garnered such a strong popularity in its past that most people ignore this decline, and critics don't bother with something with such a strong fan base. And plus, little kids can't tell the difference, so SB's fan base still has size. While I agree that my previous sources were not exactly usable for a encyclopedia, it seems like the only option right now is to rely on fans. It's a dead end unless multiple (wise) critics write something about this issue or if Wikipedia gives popular opinion more credit.booksrule9 (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with booksrule9. Critics should be paying more attention to SB's decline in quality, but since its demographic (little kids) will watch anything on Nick, no one seems to notice. IMO, SB was a lot better before Hillenburg resigned as executive producer. It's sad, really. I'd like to see the decline in quality section back as well, but for now, there are no reliable sources to back it up. 12.73.212.204 (talk) 21:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't seem that notable critics are paying any attention to the show at all (apart from analyzing profit margins), so it's difficult to find any assessments, positive or negative. For what it's worth, I agree that the show was once great but has been very poor for a number of years now. Esn (talk) 13:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad to see it's not just me who thinks the show went down the drain after it's short hiatus. It's really awful! But don't expect "critics" or reviewers to notice differences in quality...I learned that lesson back in 1983 when few reviewers of the time caught just how deeply bad The Return Of The Jedi was, and praised it to the hilt, as they has the prior movies. This also happened two years earlier when Superman II received glowing reviews, critics not understanding how bad a piece of filmmaking this was (not one review I read even realized that the soundtrack was just a reuse of the first film's!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.80.6.48 (talk) 02:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I just restored the "Decline of quality" section. I agree it's very important to add such data, it's really important to understand the series now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magegg (talk • contribs) 17:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

WARNING ABOUT SITE OF KID'S SPONGEBOB

Hello,Our site has alot of blockage because some people have been just saying thing's about SpongeBoB squarepants,we would like to let you know not to say anything anoying or too smart remembering that many kids will be on the site like us kids in the world.

This would be Nice If this site was not used for stuff like 2003-2009 that we would like to concider you band from the site if there is any abuse in the profile of SB.SP

Thank you for you notice-please remember never to be rude or vando(editing things kids want to see)if you would like to be reckless go to wiki answers.com a site for kids and adults

From Wikipedia,The Free Encylopedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.183.177 (talk) 02:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}}

Not done: Please see WP:NDA and WP:OWN. — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 02:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Excessive detail/OR

The "plot", "setting", and "continuity" sections contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that would interest only a small audience. Plus, much of it is uncited and therefore could count as original research. I don't want to remove it just yet though, I'd like to discuss it first. Pittsfordljb (talk) 19:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Spongebob Mini Marathon on TV Land

here is the link http://forums.tvland.com/tvln/board/message?board.id=2069&message.id=98#M98, it says starting at 7am eastern but i think its 7am for everyone who has this channel because I notice that there were two episodes left at 8-9am for this marathon on the guide and I live Pacific standard time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rokusho (talk • contribs) 04:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

About Bikini Bottom's population...

In WhoBob WhatPants?, the population on the sign stated it was 538, but in Pretty Patties, there were 46 853 customers at Spongebob's customer area, hinting that the population could be much higher. Maybe the population is indeterminate and non-canon. Could that be possible? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.99.51.131 (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a massive decrease in population occurred between the events of "Pretty Patties" and "WhoBob WhatPants?"? It could be a possibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.71.100 (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thats Because The Atlantis-Bikini Bottom Metro Area Has A population of 12,098,001(2008 Census) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.80.32 (talk) 14:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Also in Pretty Patties,the population was only 307 for bikini bottom.

Well, Bikini Bottom was destroyed by Spongebob and Partick several times, so maybe the explosion killed the majority of the citizens. I think the population is non-canon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sega31098 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I think that it's a pretty reasonable theory that the city's population changes over time.--76.174.71.100 (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

In a more recent episode, when a giant boat was going to collide with Bikini Bottom, Ms. Puff stated that he would be killing "millions" of people in a moment when nearly colliding with the city. What's up with that? What? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sega31098 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

really guys you are going to argue about the population of bikini bottom. I think it is non canon. who said that the makers of sponge bob can't change it up when they feel neccesary ?--RIVER 01:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rio44 (talk • contribs)

New episode

There is a BRAND NEW Spongebob Special premireing Thursday July 24,2009 called Square Roots and someone needs to add that to the episodes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funist20 (talk • contribs) 17:42, July 20, 2009

No citation about official Facebook and Twitter pages.

There doesn't appear to be a citation for that. I am on both social networking sites and I have yet to find an official page on either site. --74.130.32.27 (talk) 23:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

More series?

Steve Hillenburg will be making 9 seasons before he retires.Hillenburg is going to make a new show about mermaid man and barnacle boy which he will hope to make 4 seasons

Yes, I would also like to see a source for this information. Mokoniki (talk) 00:07, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Mokoniki

Do you have a source? I've looked and I cannot find one. Dared111 (talk) 21:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Cleaner

Almost finished cleaning the article from repetition, I only have to move the marathons described to its own "Marathon" section. Dared111 (talk) 08:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

That's done now. I've left some data about marathons in the production section so relevant data can be moved somewhere else. Dared111 (talk) 08:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Patrick Star Question

I noticed on the patrick star page on spongepedia that Patricks birthdate and current age is shown how or where did you get that info? Multimusiclover1 (talk) 03:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

This isn't the place to ask. Here on Wikipedia, information is supported by reliable sources. If the information isn't here, it is possible that someone made it up on Spongepedia. You probably will not find the answer here though. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 03:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I apologize for my disruptive editing. Multimusiclover1 (talk) 16:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

editprotected

{{editsemiprotected}} In section "Merchandising and marketing", please replace "PEZ dispensers" with "Pez dispensers" (per WP:MOSTM and Pez/Pez dispenser). Thanks. 62.147.62.97 (talk) 17:15, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Y Done Cheers,  Skomorokh  17:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

This article sucks

Sorry, guys. I know your trying to clean this article, but for now, it sucks. The "Music" section is a poor, cluttered list, and if this article is shooting for GA, it needs more sources. Also, the Episode section is unecessary and the merchandise part needs a trim.

Well if the article sucks, then why don't you help out? Mokoniki | talk 13:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I'd get to it if you guys would unlock the page. User:Phil A. Fry (talk) ) 08:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Just a question about show time

I noticed this series is shown ALOT on Direct TV Its very hard to find a time when spongebob isnt on. It has more air time than Family Guy I think What is its normal Hours per Week? Is it the most shown? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.233.195.133 (talk) 20:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

My error section

Why did you remove my error section, I did not see any thing wrong with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyoffacliff (talk • contribs) 19:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

It's as Mr Kupo said, the error section is not needed. It's not encyclopedic. Besides, I looked at it, through page history, and it was riddled with spelling errors. It was also original research and that's against Wikipedia policy. Mokoniki | talk 19:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

spongebob is a gay —Preceding unsigned comment added by KEITH567 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I thought Squidward was a Squid and not an Octopus?Kongkit (talk) 00:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)KongkitKongkit (talk) 00:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Protected page

Can someone restore the protection icon at the top right hand corner of the article? Tinton5 (talk) 01:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Squidward

--Brandon1296 (talk) 22:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Squidward is not a squid, he is an octopus. --asyuli4211 (talk) 22:23, 25 December 2010 (UTC) Squidward is a squid. SQUIDward. Please fix this Asyuli4211 (talk) 03:25, 26 December 2010 (UTC)asyuli4211

Adult humour

I suggest a better example of adult humour in the "Humour" section. "Certain innuendos, in particular, are intended to go over the younger viewers' heads...in one episode, Squidward tricked SpongeBob and Patrick into thinking he was a ghost". Ghost - that is not adult humour, kids understand that. An excellent example is at the start of the episode where SpongeBob is watching a dancing sponge on TV and looking excited, and when Gary enters the room he quickly changes the channel to the football. Can we include that one instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plarter (talk • contribs) 11:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I would have to agree, and think that would be a perfect example. Maybe even a mention of the bondage style leather straps that are sometimes worn by the citizens. Dark verdant (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree also, but I think that a good example would be when spongebob says "patrick, your genious is showing!" to which patrick replies "agh!" and proceeds to cover his 'getleman's area'. however, the epiosode this is from escapes me...

The source cited in that area directs you to the spongebob website. That is not an adequate source. Atomforyou (talk) 19:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Improvements to this article

Well, now that I'm a member of the SpongeBob WikiProject, I've helped this article out a little. I revised the "History" section and got rid of a few things. Anyone is welcome to help further. I hope that this article can become a GA. Also, hail the SpongeBob WikiProject! -Phil Fry (talk) 16:45, 05 November 2009 (UTC)

Sheldon Plankton

"...all of his schemes usually end in failure"

Either the "all" or the "usually" has to go. It's terribly clunky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.73.192.164 (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Deleted Scene?

I added information about a deleted scene from "Just One Bite" StevenMario (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Sheldon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.207.7 (talk) 01:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Guest appearances

DO guest appearances really need to be in here? I don't tihnk guest appearances are really important unless they are recurring voice actors (which means no). Also no sources for them either.Bread Ninja (talk) 17:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The guest appearances are irrelevant. Plus, their significance is not great enough to create such a long list and take up so much space. booksrule9 (talk) 06:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

shorten beginning

Can we shorten part of the top? Thanks. Brainulator9 18:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brainulator9 (talk • contribs)

Songs

What are the name of the most famous Rap versions of SpongeBob SquarePants? Really, looking for a rap version to listen to! Thank you. --WhiteInKnights (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is Not a Forum for general discussion.

Please ask this on Yahoo! Answers or something, thanks! estemshorn ^{happy new year} 19:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Typo in article

{{editsemiprotected}} At the end of the second sentence in the Development (1984-1999) section, please change "SpongBob" to "SpongeBob" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.254.145 (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2010

Done Welcome and thanks. Celestra (talk) 23:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} Another typo: "seies,however,shortly" in section "Hillenburg Era ..." Leeliv (talk) 12:09, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

There are also Songs like: --Christle2212 (talk) 01:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Christle2212,12/29/2010 When I ripped my pants ,The bubble song,Cant keep my eyes off you,Gary's song,idiot freinds,Stadium Rave,The campfire song song,Goofy goober song,This grill is not a home,Goofy goober rock,F.U.N song,Doing thes pongDont,be a jerk,The best day ever,My tighty whiteys,Wheres Gary?,The very first Christmas,Now that were men,We got scurvey and,Ridin the hook.All on Itunes if i missed any songs just edit.

Wrong Words

{{editsemiprotected}}

In the / 2003 / Golden Reel Award / Best Sound Editing in Television Animation / Episodes: "Nasty Patty" and "Idiot Box" / Won

Please change "Idiot Box" to "Idiot Boy"

Not done: "Idiot Box" is correct. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/awards VerballyInsane 04:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Influence

Not sure if this is relevant but two kids in separate instances remembered episodes from Sponge Bob to save their friends: A 12-year old girl performed the Heimlich maneuver when her friend was choking on gum; she had remembered Sponge Bob did the same thing when Squidward was choking on his clarinet. An 8-year old boy rescued his friend who was drowning when he remembered how Larry the Lobster saved a drowning fish. Angry bee (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Iamindefinite, 17 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Under Criticism and controversy it says that there was a pro-homosexual group sponsering the video. What the fuck is a pro-homosexual group? It just sounds like some bigots way of saying a group that promote the toleranse and exceptions towards homosexuals. Wikipedia need to change this. This is not Family first`s homepage. Iamindefinite (talk) 13:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)q

Y Done Changed to "pro-tolerance" as stated in the source. SpigotMap 13:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Music

Lux Interior from The Cramps should be added to the list of alternative bands that have been featured on Spongebob. They were on the episode SpongeBob's House Party (Party Pooper Pants). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qphyto (talk • contribs) 23:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Decline in quality

This definitely needs to be mentioned. The show lost it's feel after Stephen Hillenburg resigned. All the examples of humour given in the humour section are absent after Season 4. I have even had younger siblings and acquaintances tell me "They're making spongebob gay now."

Additionally, the importance of Krabby Patties is greatly exaggerated in the newer seasons. Plankton is the only lasting antagonist in the series, and you know something is wrong when the sole antagonist for 9 seasons continues because he wants the ingredients for a burger.

The newer episodes of spongebob are flat-out depressing to watch, and if you are not 3 years old, you'd agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.155.223 (talk) 06:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

If we had a statement from a few critics, then maybe it could be included. EDIT: According to the page about Stephen Hillenburg, he's still executive producer. So... Atomforyou (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Please refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SpongeBob_SquarePants#Decline_in_Quality booksrule9 (talk) 04:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Ansmwke, 19 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} please change the number of seasons from 7 to 8. the 8th season started in 2010. verified via imdb

Ansmwke (talk) 22:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Not done for now: Looks like it starts in early 2011, see SpongeBob SquarePants (season 8) →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 00:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

-=Cartoon Sexuality= Dennis ==

I've started a section about this one reference on the Reliable Sources noticeboard at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Cartoon_Sexuality, any interested parties may want to participate. Judgeking (talk) 22:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be that this section discusses current controversies and should remain Judgeking (talk) 00:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The consensus at RS noticeboard is that A. the source is an RS and B. the RS noticeboard is not the place for determining whether something is of undue weight.

Undue weight is an editorial concern, and that is resolved on an article by article basis on the talk page(s).

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

This really doesnt need to be up here its rediculus you need to mention it. Its just Stupid how you HAD to put it here thats all im saying. Christle2212,12/29/2010--Christle2212 (talk) 01:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

I'm a longtime fan of SpongeBob, but I don't remember anybody affiliated with the series saying anything about where Bikini Bottom actually is. Who said that Bikini Bottom is off the coast of Bikini Atoll? 97.96.65.123 (talk) 21:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Johnny Depp as a guest star

In the episode "The Big One", Johnny Depp guest stars as that surfer dude guy who tells SpongeBob and Patrick about The Big One (I forget his name). I think this should be noted. I would also like to point your attention to the above section, also written by me, which has not seen any activity as of yet (probably because it's small and nobody noticed). But anyways, Johnny Depp was a guest star in "The Big One". 97.96.65.123 (talk) 19:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

List of Guest Stars

I would like to suggest adding a list of guest stars that have appeared on SpongeBob Squarpants. There have been quite a lot, actually. The ones I can name off the bat are Johnny Depp (The Big One), Davy Jones (The Big One), David Bowie (Atlantis SquarePantis), P!nk (Truth or Square), and maybe Tim Conway (Barnacle Boy), but he's been on the show several times, so maybe he could be a "recurring guest". 97.96.65.123 (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree Kyle1081 (talk) 22:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

SpongePedia has moved

New link: en.spongepedia.org --88.65.59.234 (talk) 20:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Can someone please add the adress? --178.3.207.138 (talk) 00:56, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

"Criticism and decline in quality" section restored

Wikipedia should not only display positive propaganda about SpongeBob. Sounds very communist/socialist. Critics who accuse the show of declining in quality should not be shunned as non-notable. And it wouldn't be much of a surprise if nobody in the press or a site considered "notable" addressed the issues of decline, as they only want to convey a positive attitude due to the show still being popular. Yet there must be some more references from noted sites, journalism, etc. out there. But you guys seem too lazy to investigate and check it out. I think we should find some way to keep such a section for sure. Classicalfan2 (talk) 13:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

That's not how it works. If you want this section kept, you find the cites. Unfortunately all the whole section relies on is a single article by one commentator, that doesn't contain most of what is claimed here. To go into the detail;

• The section title "Criticism and decline in quality" is not neutral, as it states "decline in quality" as if it was fact, rather than opinion.
• "Many critics and SpongeBob fans believe". - Weaselly attributed claim. Who are these critics and fans? How are we to know their opinion is notable?
• "As a result, many fans have been turned away of the series." - Uncited claim. Where has this been claimed and what evidence is there for it?
• "a huge change was the resignation of Stephen Hillenburg as head of the series," - Uncited claim.
• "Because of this, many old writers resigned" - Uncited claim.
• The single cite that follows say none of the above and is only evidence that one commentator is unhappy.

As for your propaganda/communist/socialist complaints. What on earth are you talking about? No-one is "shunning" critics. All that is required is that material in the article, of any sort, is properly cited. Produce the cited criticism and we have something to base the section on. Until then it's all the unsourced opinions of people unknown without any factual basis. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I could have been a bit mistaken about the section and its restoration. But I know what I'm talking about for sure with "propaganda, communist, and socialist". I believe Wikipedia leans to the left on many issues, and so does much of the media. That may very well be part of why inclusion of material negative to the show is rejected by WP and the media. Just my hunch. Classicalfan2 (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

"Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly or commonly owned and controlled co-operatively, or a political philosophy advocating such a system." "Communism is a sociopolitical movement that aims for a classless and stateless society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, and the end of wage labour and private property in the means of production and real estate." (The first sentences of each respective Wikipedia article are here used as working definitions of those concepts.) Now, what exactly does the quality of recent Spongebob cartoons have to do with either of those things? I ask because, even granting for the sake of argument that Wikipedia and "the media" tend to lean left politically (from the point of view of American politics), the show's popularity and quality apparently have nothing to do with communism or socialism. 24.129.30.235 (talk) 16:06, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Who knew Spongebob was such a political hot potato? Can I go ahead and remove this badly cited section? As I said, if more and better sources can be found for this material it can be included. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Traduzcan el siguiente texto: Bob esponja ya no es lo que era!!!! Desde que Stephen Hillenburg renunció a su cargo la serie se fue al cuerno... Lo dice un fan molesto!! Y hay muchos más!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.14.204.186 (talk) 01:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I see absolutely nothing in this article that says anything about the show's decline in quality. Why is that? It's clearly something fans of the show have pointed out for years. It should be added. 74.88.97.42 (talk) 17:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

get the photo of ejaculation removed NOW

REMOVE IT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.26.37 (talk) 02:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Put it back! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.171.133 (talk) 02:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Drawing of SpongeBob (Can I add it?)

I've been creating several graphics in the past years. I just remembered I have a SVG drawing of SpongeBob that we could use in the article. Is it ok to add it? I ask because it seems weird to me that the article doesn't have any picture of the main character. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 15:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Even if you created it and drew it from scratch, its still a likeness of a copyrighted character, so it may not be allowed. That said, a small, low resolution image should be allowable under Fair Use. -- nsaum75 ^{!Dígame¡‎} 04:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Spongebob over rated for little kids?

Some parents are saying spongebob has a bad influence on kids. Because they act dumb and they "sass" each other. Parents are worried if their children watch it they will start acting like them. Parent's are deciding not let their little kids watch spongebob.( I completley disagree with the parents)--B.zippy2212 (talk) 20:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Why would some people do that? SpongeBob isn't overrated as well, but SpongeBob is mostly the highest-rated show for all ages. Nobody else thinks that SpongeBob is not for kids. Although the recent episodes of SpongeBob was criticized due to it's not living up the old episodes, but not the entire show just got criticized. The episode Sailor Mouth didn't immune to negative reception, but it did only criticized by WatchDog media group and they're was an report entitled Wolves in Sheep's Clothing and [ which documents the increase in potentially violent, profane, and sexual content in children's programming, the Parent's Television Council, a watchdog media group, believed the SpongeBob SquarePants episode "Sailor Mouth" was an implicit attempt to promote and satirize use of profanity among children. The episode originally aired during the 2001–2002 television season, ironically the season in which the PTC named SpongeBob SquarePants among the best programs on cable television,[7] but the report cited a repeat broadcast of the episode from 2005 to prove its point that it promoted use of profanity among children. In a later report, several members of the PTC listed "Sailor Mouth" as an example of how levels of profane, sexual, and violent activity has increased in children's television programming.[8] Richard Huff of the New York Daily News criticized the report for misinterpreting an episode of SpongeBob SquarePants, "Sailor Mouth", over its intent to satirize profanity implicitly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.56.27.184 (talk) 21:56, 4 July 2011 (UTC) I think that the parents are rigt Spongebob is violent and stupid. There is way too much violence. Spongebob has been proven to be bad for small children. in alot of episodes people almost die. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.167.250.232 (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

Caption under the picture of Bikini Atoll and Bikini Bottom has directions reversed. I don't have edit privileges. Can someone fix that? -66.253.136.138 (talk) 00:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Is it possible this article may need to be rewritten completely?

I found many people to be arguing over the inconsistencies of this article. Personally, I think it's very poorly written, and nobody can edit it because it's locked. Does it need to be rewritten completely, or do a vast amount of changes have to be made? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.88.97.42 (talk) 20:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, if it was something we wanted to do, we'd definitely have to discuss it first before making any plans. I don't think it's as bad as you say it is, but if it was something we'd want to do, I'd be on board to do it. If you were just able to say the specific problems you have with the article, that'd be great. 74.88.97.42 (talk) 20:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

If you want 2 do it so badly y don't u reedit it yourself? 74.88.97.42 (talk) 09:36, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

SpongeBob in Translation

Hey there! I was just wondering whether there is/should be an article related to SpongeBob SquarePants in translation, similar to Harry Potter in translation. If there isn't, would anyone consider making one? I would help, of course. Get back to me with what you reckon.

TheFartyDoctor talk 20:42, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

spongebob squrepants

is spongebob in the category in fantasy as a genre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.45.164.121 (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Missing Section

What happened to the section "Criticism of Decline in quality" or something along those lines? 121.218.224.189 (talk) 03:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

What is SpongeBob underwear?

I'm reading a reference to "SpongeBob underwear" in a Salon.com article, "Our year of toilet training hell". What are these? __meco (talk) 09:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Season chronologies

It looks like most of the seasons of this show have begun before the finale of the previous season has aired. So how are the seasons defined? By the production code numbers of the episodes? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 12 November 2011

Update charaters with who they are you can find lots of characters on http://spongebob.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_characters thank you!!

2.121.39.56 (talk) 16:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

N Not done This template is for specific requests, also the Spongebob Wikia will have far more characters that won't be notable for Wikipedia. CTJF83 19:19, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

wrong title

change idiot box to idiot boy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.39.56 (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC) This is the dumbest show ever! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.37.91 (talk) 22:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Violent Spongebob

Spongebob was reported to be bad for kids that are four years or younger. The scenes in Spongebob change about every 15 seconds. Research says that faster shows are not good for small children. Spongebob can be violant, an example is the fude between Mr. Krabs and Plankton. Mr. Krabs has thrown Plankton so hard that Plankton has splated in to the Chum Bucket. Mr. Krabs has also stepped on Plankton repeatedly. Squidward has hatrid twards Spongebob, Patrik, Mr. Krabs, and everybody on the show even the extras. Patrik is an idiot, being an can also is violent. When Sandy almost drownds that is violent. What Sandy wears under the suit is not very apropreate, Sandy is far under dressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.167.250.232 (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Another attraction

There is a spongebob attraction at Cedar point, Sandusky, Ohio. It is 3-d and is currently operated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.65.101.37 (talk) 01:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Important Section Missing

What happened to the "Criticism of Decline in Quality" section? It is an important part of SpongeBob's history and reception. The Simpsons article has a section on it. SpongeBob's is just as noticable. Compare a season 2 episode to a season 8 one. Like that user (BOVINEBOY2008) said before: "This is not bias. It is only the statement of an audience. If this is considered biase, movie reviews and critiques would be considered biase too. I think this decline is an overlooked issue." Many fans have reached a consensus that the show has become less funny following Stephen Hillenburg's resignation."

And as the other user (booksrule9 (talk) said: "If the reason it was biased is because there was only one source, then can I substantiate the "Decline in Quality" section by providing more sources? I have no intention of disputing your claim. However, I believe I can prove that SpongeBob SquarePants decline in quality is notable and verifiable." Sources: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/6/bringbacktheoldspongebob http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/better-episodes-for-spongebob-squarepants http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/133754890?p=1 http://unlocked-wordhoard.blogspot.com/2006/05/medieval-spongebob.html http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=218185 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/thread/143620008 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/142643160?p=1 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206512/board/nest/141586205?p=1 Do not all these opinions make this claim notable? Do they not make this claim verifiable? Am I correct to define bias a tendency to be one sided? Since there is praise in this article, should there not be criticism to "balance" the viewpoints? How can one deny the large presence of these opinions? If opinions are shown to be representative of an audience, doesn't it make the decline in quality a valid viewpoint? I stand by my argument that SpongeBob SquarePant's decline in quality is not biased and is an accurate statement of SpongeBob's current state of production."

124.183.174.183 (talk) 04:54, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Completely agree. I've been wondering what happened to that section for a while. The decline is extremely obvious to anyone who has watched an episode from seasons 1 through 3, and is an important viewpoint that should be provided in this article. Someone should put it back! Yellow1996 (talk) 19:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Somebody write it back in then! 74.88.97.42 (talk) 01:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)