Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Party Pooper Pants
- 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 redirect to SpongeBob SquarePants (season 3)#"Party Pooper Pants". Smerge all sourceable content. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Party Pooper Pants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable episode, no sources found. Only hits in Gnews were TV.com which is user submitted. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to SpongeBob SquarePants (season 3)#"Party Pooper Pants". It is a valid search term. Armbrust Talk Contribs 23:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect. Content exists but not enough for a stand-alone article, at least not in the near future. BOVINEBOY2008 02:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is this here? It's got a clear redirect target... was it redirected and/or merged and then contested? Really, in such clear-cut cases where there's a season merge target and no assertion that the title itself is inappropriate for a redirect, I'd really rather not see these here unless editors can't agree to a merge or redirect. Jclemens (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete- the only kind of content which is mergeable is sourced content, which this isn't. The thing to do would be to rewrite our coverage on this episode, properly, at the SBSP season 3 page and then recreate this article as a redirect to there. Reyk YO! 00:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.