Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timo Kahlen

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. ^King Jakob _C2 11:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Timo Kahlen[edit]

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

Escalating from prod. Not a single award mentioned in text appears notable. Big list of external links none of which look mainstream. A few references cited in a book format, none of which I can verify, and which could well be just exhibition uncatalogued or such. Definitely needs opinion from a German speaker to verify sources/comment on notability in German-language net. A German speaker may want to AfD de:Timo Kahlen to get input from de Wiki editors. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Theopolisme (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While the article can do with some sorting the references from the German counterpart convinced me of its notability. While I did not remember the name of the artist I certainly can remember the presscoverage of the cleaner incident in Amberg. Agathoclea (talk) 13:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC) P.S.: de:Deutscher Klangkunst-Preis seems relevant on deWiki Agathoclea (talk) 13:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per above discussion indicating substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2013 (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.