Talk:SpongeBob SquarePants season 9

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SpongeBob SquarePants season 9 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

SpongeBob SquarePants season 9 has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 15, 2018. (Reviewed version).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Aspect ratio (image)#1.66:1, 1.75:1, 1.77:1, 1.78:1 and 16:9 standard widescreen|1.78:1 aspect ratio]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

This article was nominated for deletion on July 7, 2011. The result of the discussion was redirect to List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes#Season 9: 2012.

A fact from SpongeBob SquarePants season 9 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 September 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that season 9 is the longest-running of SpongeBob SquarePants seasons, airing for four and a half years?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2018/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/SpongeBob SquarePants (season 9).

Wikipedia

Animation: American / Television Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated television work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Television: Episode coverage / Nickelodeon Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Nickelodeon task force (assessed as High-importance).

Lists List‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Season 10[edit]

Dear 24.101.56.246

season 10 is not confirmed yet. It should not be its next season if its not announced. Canihuan300 (talk) 18:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not confirmed because it's fake information. Season 9 will end SpongeBob. Not that I hate the show, but I kinda want it to end with season 9. Because let's face it, if the show was to continue after the second movie, it would go more and more downhill as the years go by, and it will eventually become extremly boring. I'd bet that about 7-10 years after the second movie comes out the show will be forgotten. --71.74.87.105 (talk) 01:14, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Season 10 is a mirage. This second movie would be a great way to close this show already ! Face it, it's been airing since May 1999 and, for over 9 months, has held the record for most episodes of aNick show. Nick is overdoing everything and should at least start airing more Fairly Odd Parents again, or something.

To get a sense of how long Spongebob has been on air, the U.S. president back in 1999 was Bill Clinton. --64.113.187.199 (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Redirect this page Again![edit]

Canihuan300 (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Top of this page[edit]

This page is not redirected anymore. someone edit the top of this page.Canihuan300 (talk) 14:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone fix the page?[edit]

Some idiot deleted the episode section with summaries, and I tried to fix it but I messed it up more. I brought back the section but it's at the end of the page. The same thing happened with the T.U.F.F. Puppy episode page. Can someone fix it please?--67.85.2.100 (talk) 19:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anonced Episodes[edit]

185 It Came From Goo Lagoon 187a Seance Scheme 187b Yeti Krabs 188a Dont Look Now 188b Kenny The Cat 189 Spongebon,Youre Fired 190a Sponge Or Treat 190b Brainless — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.216.153 (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unannounced Episodes[edit]

Has episode 191a been anounced yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.216.153 (talk) 22:06, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 6 June 2013[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

June 21,2013 is the day that It Came From Goo Lagoon airs 82.13.84.198 (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. BryanG (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Add Episode 185|It Came From Goo Lagoon to the episode list — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.216.153 (talk) 00:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also, Wikipedia is not a TV guide, so there's no rush for this information to be added. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We wont get any new episodes until July this year nick is airing new episodes every other mounth >:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.216.153 (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Airdates[edit]

No new episodes this mounth spongebob is on hiatus every other mounth(Feb,April,June,Aug,Oct,Dec) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.216.153 (talk) 21:13, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Episode Titles[edit]

Is there any evidence of Season 9 episodes past "SpongeBob You're Fired" since,Season 10's in production?

Episode numbering[edit]

Why are the episode on this list numbered in the way they are, instead of in broadcast sequence? For example, why is "Kenny the Cat" numbered 10a (aired March 29, 2014), while "SpongeBob, You're Fired!" is numbered 11 (aired last November)? And "Yeti Krabs" is listed as 10b, and it hasn't even aired yet. "Safe Deposit Krabs" listed as 8a, aired on May 25, 2013, yet 8b, "Plankton's Pet" aired 4 months before it, on January 29, 2013. Someone's smoking something funny. --Captain Infinity (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unexppained Edit[edit]

I could not add what I changed. Anyway, no one knows for sure if Krab's Army and SpaceBob InvaderPants are real episodes. Spongebob tales of a sudden death (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:SpongeBob SquarePants (season 9)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Figfires (talk · contribs) 14:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I will be reviewing this article. I will try to get this wrapped up in a timely manner.

@Figfires: Thank you so much! AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I did not see spelling mistakes when I went through. The Grammar and flow issues I pointed out have since been corrected so it passes this section.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Complies with guidelines for lead sections, layout, fiction, and list incorporation. There was an instance of puffery, but that was removed.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Complies with the layout guideline. Over 100 references are on the list which is a decent size given the amount of content present. Originally, there were many repetitive references that bloated out multiple sections, but that was fixed by the nominator so this passes 2a.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Most of the references are from reliable news sources and/or statistic sites. I don't know about all the sources so I am not exactly qualified on that front, but someone should probably review the references to make sure they are all reliable. From what I saw, most of the references are coming from reputable newspapers, TVGuide, etc... and can be relied upon to backup the article.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No original research was present in the article.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	I ran the entire article through a plagiarism checker and came back with 0 hits (other than wikipedia of course). There is nothing else in the article that would warrant a copyright violation other than the media which I have already checked. So... there are no plagiarism or copyright violations.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The main aspects of season 9... The production, cast, reception, episodes, and release are all mentioned in sufficient detail.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The production section is very bloated and contains unnecessary amounts of detail. There is an excessive level of direct quotes which is not required. This needs to follow summary style as the article is not about just the production. Please use season 8's article as an example of what summary style is going forward. I have removed the bloatedness somewhat, but additional fixes may be required.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Does not have much editorial bias and it written in a pretty neutral tone. The article is written like an encyclopedic entry and not a tabloid issue.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Pretty stable, no recent edit warring. Have been some minor disputes and vandalism, but other than that, the article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images either have a fair use rationale or copyright permission from the owner.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	All images in the text itself have suitable captions describing them and are relevant to the topic as the featured individuals were guest cast members.
	7. Overall assessment.	Overall, this article was ready for a review and did not require an extreme amount of corrections in order to fix the issues I saw. This article has passed the Good Article Review

@Figfires: Thank you so much! I appreciate it a ton. AmericanAir88 (talk) 18:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong credits[edit]

FFS storyboard director and supervisor are not the same thing, and by that logic every spongebob episode before season 9 should have the supervisor credited VeryFirst (talk) 05:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]