- 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 keep. I'm going with the keeps on this one. Feel free to improve the article with the many sources presented. (And you can use primary sources - but sparingly, of course!) Missvain (talk) 17:58, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Karl Rock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This BLP has been sitting at the back of the NPP queue for many weeks. The subject might be notable but it looks pretty doubtful to me and I think we’re in BLPIE territory. Bringing it here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete can’t find anything that suggests notability --Devokewater 19:56, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Classic WP:BLP1E as described bu User:NZFC below. The sound of the bottom of the notability barrel being scraped is clear. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 21:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Your rationale is basically "because I don't like it" 98.42.61.224 (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you have any COI on this topic? DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 05:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not affiliated with this person in any way. Do you have a personal vendetta against him?98.42.61.224 (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Try-hard social media wannabes don't deserve to be considered notable. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, so you do have a personal vendetta against him. Got it. Try giving actual reasons instead of using personal attacks against him. 98.42.61.224 (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I've actually come across the YouTube channel, and wanting to know more, found nothing. People doing this tend to avoid having information about them known, and even the YouTube personae are not independently documented. These people aren't known in the form of biographies at all. Uncle G (talk) 21:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep https://boingboing.net/2021/03/25/karl-rock-goes-to-dubai-to-chat-with-low-level-scammers.html https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/nz-youtuber-karl-rock-reveals-the-trick-he-used-to-impress-his-haryanvi-jat-girlfriends-parents-2918405.html 98.42.61.224 (talk) 03:39, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Neither of those is a biography, and they are almost devoid of any biographical detail. Indeed, the sum total of the informational content of the first is in the URL. Where is a biography of this person, documenting xyr life/work? Failing that, where is a detailed independent source documenting the YouTube persona in detail? Uncle G (talk) 07:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Mostly relies on primary sources. Next to no significant coverage by reliable secondary sources. Throast (talk) 17:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Article did not help his case with primary sources, trivial mentions, unreliable sources, and many links which don't work, but Google News appears to have a lot of significant coverage on him. Given how small New Zealand is, it is almost inevitable that anyone with 1.42 millions subscribers who is a New Zealander in India will get coverage by New Zealand's local news outlets and India's outlets because of the novelty.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: Further discussion is needed to gather consensus on whether the links given by Nexus000 show notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Bilorv (talk) 01:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Mccapra and Devokewater—do your comments still stand in light of the links given by Nexus000? Are any of those sources reliable, independent and in-depth? — Bilorv (talk) 01:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. This really is unusual. The sources highlighted by Nexus000 probably aren’t all reliable but most of them are. The thing is they all say what is already in the article. There’s a guy from NZ living in India who has Youtube channel who gave blood once, and some other pretty insignificant things. I suggested BLP1E would apply in this case because there is so little substance to the topic, but the number of sources all saying the same few things may mean that’s not valid. Mccapra (talk) 03:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a popular YouTube channel; and, as I noted above, would that someone had written about xem in depth! But no-one seems to have put in the effort of doing so. Uncle G (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thanks Bilorv (talk) I will take a look at these. Regards --Devokewater 08:26, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as it satisfies both WP:BASIC and WP:GNG as per the existence of reliable secondary sources. Roulisegee (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC) — Roulisegee (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Delete This is WP:BLP1E, while I commend Nexus000 for finding all those links they all just relate back to one real event. Looking at BLP1E criteria, the person is only covered in context of a single event, is likely to remain a low-profile individual and the event isn't substantial or well documented (as pointed out, some even just reference what is on Wikipedia now itself). Then even the creator of the page hasn't made a comment since it was nominated for deletion. NZFC(talk)(cont) 01:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Article is good enough to pass WP:BASIC with the sources indicated by Nexus000. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 16:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Including the one, as I had pointed out before that list was compiled, had no content beyond what was in its URL? How many others are like that, do you think? I picked the stuff.co.nz one at random and it contained no factual information about Karl Rock whatsoever. It was written by Karl Rock and about something else. That list was created by search engine phrase matching, not reading. Uncle G (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Uncle G, of course, including the ones indicated below. So, don't bother arguing with me. My keep stands no matter what. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 10:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Clearly a WP:BLP1E known for some insignificant events. The problem is that now a days every viral YouTube video is covered by the media to fill their digits pages, that why there is a rise in YouTuber biographies. defcon5 (talk) 06:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: There is consensus that
WP:GNG is met. However, consensus has yet to develop as to whether the topic surpasses
WP:BLP1E
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak KeepHe's covered by multiple reliable sources in India. As for BLP1E, I understand that reasoning, but believe there is lasting coverage, he continues to have stories written about him more than 6 months later.--Rusf10 (talk) 03:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: A non notable youtuber from India who fails GNG. This comes under BLPE1. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 23:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: Giving this a third relist in hopes that the BLP1E element will receive more discussion and thus a clear consensus can be found.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment He has been mentioned a few times for a few different things when you break down all the links, I still feel however it is very artifical in that its just taken to write a story about whatever his video was about. Nothing in depth of Karl himself. All I've learnt is he used to work in IT, he had a india girlfriend and learnt hindi and then moved to India. So now makes videos about it. If that is enough with these stories that are just about his videos, then fine but I don't think it meets WP:GNG myself and still vote delete.NZFC(talk)(cont) 22:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably the article with the most about Karl, telling how he speaks hindi and is travelling/living in India
- Next best article introducting him after plasma went viral, again doens't say a lot of indepth about Karl still
- Just a bit about him travelling and why he is in India
- Story about donating plasma
- Racist attack and blurb about donating plasma
- Mentions the Humans of Delhi story about trying to impress girlfriends parents and blurb about the plasma
- A paragrath saying he lives in India but went to Dubai to confront scammers then a link to his video
- Karl is in Pakistan and talks to a young boy
- What happens next will surprise you.... title and its a nothing story. He was riding where he shouldn't by mistake but left off with a warning
- Only brief mentions by name in articles
- His own first person account of how to travel in india
- More to check out still but seems to be more of the same, more on his moving on to busting scams
- Keep - while I might think it mildly depressing that this person has so much coverage, since the primary dispute point is on whether the article avoids failing BLP1E. I have to say it does. That's on three main points: the coverage is on a couple of different things; the coverage is over a reasonable length of time; and the coverage is somewhat about his youtube channel, which is inherently not really an "event". Nosebagbear (talk) 22:33, 29 April 2021 (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.