Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christoph Köler

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. Consensus is keep, especially after citation work done by Sam Sailor. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christoph Köler

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

Article with only one reference, and that from a page in a book written in German. I find nothing that establishes notability per Wikipedia guidelines. Article subject appears to fail WP:GNG. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:12, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wikipedia article is better sourced. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep major figure in early modern German literature. English sources usually use his Latin name.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While I am not particularly convinced that the subject was a major figure in early modern German literature, he was certainly important enough to have a 250-page book written in the early 20th century on his life and work (this as a whole seems to be the one reference currently in the article, not just a page from it). The fact that the book was written in German does not damage its reliability. And while we generally require more than one reference to establish notability, there are definitely others - even excepting this one, which mainly mentions the subject to distinguish him from three other people with very similar names from much the same period. He is, for instance, mentioned or quoted repeatedly in this biography of Christian Hoffmann von Hoffmannswaldau and this book on German baroque rhetoric, and to lesser but still significant degrees here and here. PWilkinson (talk) 22:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Having a biography published on the subject that is independent of the subject and not just a book of memorial is enough to make them notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there's actually not much at first but a historical subject such as this will almost certainly have some archived information thus needed familiar attention. SwisterTwister talk 08:46, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SwisterTwister: It sounds as if you actually intended to !vote Keep. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Easily sourced, I have added a handful of {{Cite book}}s and there's plenty more to pick from. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:00, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:52, 19 November 2015 (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.