Talk:List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Rename?

the title of this article makes it sound like a website. I propose we redirect this page to List of characters from SpongeBob SquarePants or something of the sort. --Philo 06:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Octozilla?

• Who is Octozilla? Any references? -AMK152 23:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Don?

I looked through this entire article, but couldn't find anything about Don the Whale. Is he missing or am I crazy?

• I don't see him either. But I do remember him having a description on this article, but i dont remember it being removed... -AMK152 02:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Davy Jones Character?

I was browsing Davy Jones a couple of days ago, and I was pleased to see an image of him as depicted in Sponge Bob. However, some Berk has now messed up the whole series of Davy Jones articles, and now I can't find that image, or any mention of DJ on this page... Can anyone help me out? I wanna find that image and put it back on the Davy Jones' Locker page. Hail the Sponge Bob Square Pants Project!!! --Dan|^(talk) 10:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

uhhhh...

well, uh, someone wrote the word hot pants as squidward's ancester, so i changed it.

Desperate need for cleanup

Does anyone else agree that we don't need to list every single creature mentioned in the show? Seems like listing people who've only been mentioned on the show is a waste of time.Konczewski 16:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC) One additional suggestion--if you're going to add the name of an obscure, minor character, it might be a good idea to mention in what episode they appeared. The recent entry for "Stan the Manta" is a good example; I don't ever remember seeing him in any episode. Can someone provide a cite?Konczewski 11:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Stan the Manta is not a character as far as I know; I am not sure of there was this character on a videogame. -AMK152 22:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

some of the characters need to be taken out. they should only put the one seen or mentioned in the show. Oh yeah can someone put scooter on the article. he is the surfer fish.--Aved 02:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures???

This article needs some pictures!!!! though I guess copyright is an issue.

Man Ray

This character had a page here which was redirected to this page but there is nothing about them. Arniep 20:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Which Charchter

in the talk for SpongeBob SquarePants I have already stated that The Purple Doctorfish is not Dr. Gill Gilliam even though they have the same voice. Mrsanitazier 22:45, 3 November 2006 2006 (UTC)

The only difference is the color. Perch Perkins has had color change, so has Fred, Tom, and even Mr. Krabs, Squidward, SpongeBob, and Patrick in some episodes. Notice how Perch Perkins and Gill Gilliam are normally purple, but changed to orange in Once Bitten. -AMK152 02:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Gill Gilliam

I thing he should get an article... ''[[User:Kitia|Kitia]] 23:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Content To Be Merged

After closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squilliam Fancyson, the following content needs to be merged into this article, but I've no idea where it would go. Here it is for someone who actually watches the programme to do:

• Squilliam Fancyson is Squidward Tentacles's high school arch rival. Squilliam is an octopus that attended Squidward's band class, and always puts him down. He is a very wealthy, snooty, unibrow-endowed rival of Squidward who looks down at Squidward for being just a lowly cashier in a greasy spoon. He owns a private yacht, a private lake, a private heliport, a private island, and a balloon/casino. He owns beautiful clothes, velvet shirts with a leather collar, and gold-silver alloy buttons for his leather cloak.

Squilliam's first appearance was in Band Geeks, where he challenged Squidward to play his band at the Bubble Bowl, commenting that he couldn't make it. Also, he comments that he is living Squidward's dream. However, Squilliam lied, and came anyway because he wanted to watch Squidward blow it. However, at the end of "Band Geeks", Squilliam, painfully aware of how good Squidward's band's performance is, has a heart attack and is rushed to the hospital, therefore, Squidward gets him back. Squidward is painfully jealous and schemes constantly to show Squilliam he isn't a loser. He later returns in "Squilliam Returns" and thinks that Squidward is the owner of a five-star restaurant. Once again, Squidward fails to impress him when chaos erupts.

Robdurbar 09:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

New layout

Does anyone have an opinion about using the layout on my userpage here or here or here on this article? 650l2520 03:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• If there are no objections I will make the switch to this layout on my page. 650l2520 05:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I reorganised the list so that it can be searched by animal type. I just copy & pasted the descriptions into the boxes. However, many were vague so I couldn't figure out what they were and placed them in an "unclassified" box. Other problems include lack of episode appearance (some may be hoaxes so an episode appearance needs to be found and the character confirmed), inadequate description (most just give a summary of what the character did it the episode but do not describe the character), and picture placement (should an image be placed in the name column, the summary column or in a new column?). 650l2520 01:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, so User:AMK152 has registered a complaint (in a rather rude way). In his edit summary to the revert he said he did not like the voice actor column or the episode appearance column. I don't think this is a good idea. If there is no voice actor then there should be a "n/a" or "none" to indicate that it is a non-speaking role. The episode column should be there to track what episode each character was in, few characters will have a long list (then so be it). 650l2520 04:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• It was not meant to be rude...it is much better the other way. The boxes and tables make it look like an episode guide. this is a character list. Other character lists are similar. Also, characters from other eras are not grouped together, there are too many unclassified characters, the Bikini Bottomites are mixed in with non-bikini bottomites, and there arnt any pictures. Main characters are mixed through the article. --AMK152 (Talk • Contributions Leave message) 04:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• I reverted it back to is other format...I don't want the pictures to become orphaned and create a huge mess. we need a discussion here first, before it is majorly changed. --AMK152 (Talk • Contributions Leave message) 04:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• I thought this was much easier to navigate and find characters. Episode guides use boxes for good reasons and I thought this would work here too. I found other character lists to be as messy (or messier) than this one, but List of Avatar: The Last Airbender creatures is a good model. I agree that unclassified characters should just be removed as the write ups are just so bad, if those characters actually do exist then they can be re-added (the problem is that with the old list they were just scattered randomly throughout the article). Where do you think the pictures should go? a new column maybe? Non-bikini bottomites can be distinguished in the summary of the character (or an asteriks?). To make it clear the objective of the new format is to improve navigation (finding a character and standardized info) and provide a more detailed summary of each character (opposed to the one-liners). 650l2520 05:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Well, another problem is that most of the characters are fish, and your layout puts the main characters dispersed throughout the article. Also, Squidward is further down on the list and most people would be looking for "squid" when they don't know that Squidward is actually an octopus. On this list, Squidward is at the top where people can find him easier, then his article explains that he is an octopus. Also, major and minor characters are mixed in your list. There would be a large description in the middle of a few small descriptions. What I meant earlier by no voice actor, is that the credits are vague and it doesn't specifically say who voices who.--AMK152 (Talk • Contributions Leave message) 13:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to make a list of concerns so that we can address them:

1.Images - where should they be placed?

I placed them in the name column for now. I think they look fine there, but maybe should be centered in the column. I'm also ok with creating a new column or putting them in the summary column.

2.Introduction - Who should be mentioned?

Wrote an intro (see WP:LEAD) that mentions the major characters. Please add or edit it.

3.Mixing of major and minor characters - hierarchy

Each section begins with the major character followed by minor ones, feel free to move them around, though.

4.Description size - not consistent

I agree but that is what it was like when I got here (I didn't change them) and of course they need to be written more consistently. However, this doesn't have anything to do with formatting.

5.Voice actor column - ambiguous credits

Could we put a "none" for non-speaking roles and a "n/a" for ambiguous cases until it can be cleared up?

6.Episode appearances - too many to note for some 7.Too many unclassified characters - what to do with unidentified characters?

If you know what they are please move them.

8.Loss of Bikini Bottomites vs. non-bikini bottomites data.

We could create a sub-heading within the Fish table to distinguish this characteristic.

Is this a fair characterisation? 650l2520 18:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge discussion per AfD

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry the Lobster (SpongeBob SquarePants), it is recommended that Larry the Lobster (SpongeBob SquarePants) be merged into this article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe}

He shouldn't be merged. Larry has appeared in LOTS of episodes and more than once has played a key part. He deserves his own page. Bowsy 19:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Doctors

• I'm sure Gill Gilliam and "the purple doctor" are different characters. -- 87.181.84.14 17:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Different colors don't mean anything. Perch Perkins, Tom, and Farmer Jenkins have all changed colors before. ->AMK152^{(Talk • Contributions • Send message)} 12:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop Merging the charachters!

Why? Plenty of them deserve articles. At least keep Pearl and Mrs. Puff. ''[[User:Kitia|Kitia]] 17:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Size of this article

Oh God, this article is WAAAAY too big, so many characters that used to have a page are now in the major section and all bar squilliam had decent articles that shouldn't have been deleted. W need to re-create these pages as this page is turning into listcruft. I suggest the major characters are re given their pages. Henchman 2000 11:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I think this is the awesomeest thingy in the whole entire world of things that are more than just things! KWEL! DUDE ITS JUST TOTALLY WICKED! DUDE!

Dirty Bubble?

There's no Dirty Bubble! Charles Nelson Reilly recently died. He was the voice of Dirty Bubble. --66.218.12.41 01:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MrsandMrsStar.JPG

Image:MrsandMrsStar.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Anette and Evelyn

They look exactly the same. Should we delete one?

There is some distinction between the two. Look at the hair. Evelyn just has hair on the back of her head. Anette has hair on top of her head. It's actual human hair. Also look at the eyes. Anette has eyelids, but Evelyn doesn't. Plus, her eyes are bigger. —Gm1121983 21:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TinaSpongeBob.JPG

Image:TinaSpongeBob.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TimmySpongeBob.JPG

Image:TimmySpongeBob.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TinaSpongeBob.JPG

Image:TinaSpongeBob.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AnnetteSpongeBob.JPG

Image:AnnetteSpongeBob.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EvelynSpongeBob.JPG

Image:EvelynSpongeBob.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

STOP DELETING PATRICK AND GARY'S FAMILY!

Whoever keeps deleting it, STOP IT ALREADY! I'm fed up with having to revert this blatant vandalism! Go to my user page if you want to see the lost information on the holiday of Pule. [[User:Feats-O-Strength]] 15:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Dividing line between Main and Major

What do you guys think of pushing Pearl Krabs, Mermaid Man, Barnacle Boy, The Flying Dutchman, King Neptune, and Princess Mindy down as "Major" characters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack M. Crazyfish (talk • contribs) 22:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, Mindy, Neptune and the Dutchman certainly ought to go down a notch; Pearl, perhaps also, but its still debateable whether Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy should be moved down. -Grammaticus Repairo 15:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Time for some Scissors

They are our friends

We need to seriously cut down on this fancruft. We do not need a section on every single character that ever appeared. I hope to work with the project members and denizens of this page, not against.

• I suggest we make one List of Characters article. These would have main characters, and semi-main characters. People who never play a significant role, or are only seen once, do not need to be mentioned here at all. This would be the only entry for characters. Spongebob can have his own article, but none of the others. If that can't happen, we could have one on Squidward, Sandy, Patrick and Mr. Krabs, but thats it.
• This would delete 1.3 and below. There is simply no need for such detail on an encyclopedia. At a cursory look at the main article, there are three fanwikis that this is much more appropriate on. The material can be put there. We do not need it here.

I expect opposition, of course. But I encourage you all to read up on what Wikipedia is really about, what should be included, and what shouldn't. I intend to go through the whole Spongebob sereies of articles. i ^(talk) 23:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

It's now been five days without comments. Intend to do as I suggested, since silence equals consensus. I'll notify the WikiProject page of this as well, and intend to do as I suggested there, as well. i ^(talk) 23:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Restoration of recently revised 'main' character descriptions

I restored the character descriptions which I had recently revised in the 'Main' section after an anon user had reverted them to the original 'dumbed down' descriptions. I'm not being overly protective of my work--I just believe the original descriptions were unquestionably inferior (and rife with errors). Constructive users, please make whatever changes you deem appropriate. -Grammaticus Repairo 00:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Stop Changing the Main Character Section

I don't know where you are getting your information from, but if you believe that I am making some sort of an unauthorized reprint of an official character listing, you are in error. When I rewrote the 'Main' characters section, it was based purely on my own personal knowledge of the characters in the series along with a small amount of retained information already on the wiki page. In other words, this set of information was compiled and edited together by me and was not plagiarized in any way from any other source. It is NOT copyrighted because I wrote it myself! If you are going to accuse me of a copyright violation, I would appreciate it if you would provide, as evidence, a link to the source material you claim I am duplicating. -Grammaticus Repairo 14:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Can 218.101.70.152 reveal who owns the copyright and where it is published? I did a few searches in google with some text and found nothing except content which is retrieved from Wikipedia. There's nothing to indicate copyright infringement here so far. ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fishhead.JPG

Image:Fishhead.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate 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 with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Continued reverts of Main character section

I am still waiting for the anonymous user who keeps reverting my edits (and edit-protecting the page) to discuss the matter here on the talk page. My position on this remains the same--because wikipedia articles are for EVERYONE to improve, and because the material I have added to the page IS an improvement (not vandalism) and is NOT copyrighted text (I know this because I composed it myself), I will continue to restore my changes to the article. If this anonymous user has problems with this, I would encourage him/her to come and discuss the matter with me on this page. I would also appreciate hearing the opinions of any other user/contributor with an interest in this article. -Grammaticus Repairo 15:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)