Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akke Kumlien


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Akke Kumlien

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Delete per WP:N -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added some references. If someone writes a book about you, you're probably notable. -- Eastmain (talk) 04:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, according to WP:AUTHOR. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * How about according to the guideline you linked? 160.39.213.97 (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.
 * Keep. The notability of Kumlien can hardly be in question. The "article" as it stood at the time of nomination might as well have been summarily deleted as having no content, but I am actually surprised that the nominator does not withdraw the nomination at this point. There is a more recent book on Kumlien, a 272 page Stockholm University dissertation by Magdalena Gram, Bokkonstnären Akke Kumlien: tradition och modernitet, konstnärsidentitet och konstnärsroll, Stockholm: Norstedt, 1994. --Hegvald (talk) 05:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the exhibition in an important venue. Apparently sufficient sources.    DGG ( talk ) 06:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. If he has been the subject of an exhibition at the Royal Library, he must be considered notable by his peers. Tomas e (talk) 14:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep.  Per sources and exhibition.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to be sufficiently notable.--Staberinde (talk) 21:34, 4 December 2009 (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.