Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hot Karl (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus but could barely meet WP:BIO. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hot Karl
Contested prod. There was once a different article by this title deleted or redirected, but it did not have anything to do with the musician named "Hot Karl". I do not believe that this artist meets WP:BIO due to a severe lack of non-trivial coverage. JBsupreme (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep According to the article, he meets WP:MUSIC; he's signed to EMI. Also, someone fix this AfD please? --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 07:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The criterion you're looking for is number 5, which says in relevant part: "Has released two or more albums on a major label." I see no assertion of the release of 2 or more albums on EMI. deranged bulbasaur  07:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete You are of course absolutely correct; I must've mixed up WP:ATHLETE with WP:MUSIC. Obviously this guy doesn't meet the appropriate criterion. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 07:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no indication here of meeting WP:MUSIC. deranged bulbasaur  07:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 08:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Barely squeaks by WP:MUSIC criteria nos. 1, 5 and 10.  Was featured in a significant video game title, has been signed to EMI and indie label BBE, and has recorded two CD's (albeit one unreleased).  See here for more. Groupthink (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Not to be a jerk, but point 5 requires that second album be released per WP:CRYSTAL. Point 1 may not be satisfied as your link may not constitute a reliable source, and alone doesn't constitute significant coverage- it reads like a fanzine or maybe a press release. And if only point 10 applies (due to NBA Live 2003), then I'd suggest he be mentioned in that article and redirect as the point suggests. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 19:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that that one link alone justifies a keep, but there's a smattering of other articles like it out there. Ordinarily I'd agree with you on your point about the album not being released, but we're not talking about a self-recorded or self-released title here -- we're talking about an album recorded under EMI's auspices but quashed.  I'm not passionately advocating for this article to be kept, but WP:MUSIC is a guideline, not a policy, and I would argue that this article conforms to the spirit (if not the exact letter) of that guideline, which places the article just on the ragged edge of being worth kept.  Now I'll confess this is an unusual position for me to take – I normally subscribe to the "when in doubt, throw it out" school of deletion procedure – but in this case, I would advocate for a keep-and-improve. Groupthink (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There are articles about him in the Los Angeles Times (which was reprinted on 17 Nov 2002 in the Chicago Tribune) and in PopMatters, both of which I have added just now, so I'm willing to say keep based on WP:N or criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:35, 25 June 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.