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 speedy keep per WP:SK#1. A valid rationale for deletion has not been presented. For examples of valid deletion rationales, see WP:DEL-REASON. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:45, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ana Maria Bahiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Reference links are broken Prof TPMS (talk) 14:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it. DanielGSouza (talk) 14:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. DanielGSouza (talk) 15:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• speedy keep Notability is easily establishes [1] by google search. And the nominator has to carefully learn how AfD works: due diligence, deletion criteria, etc.. - üser:Altenmann >t 15:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep she passes GNG. I added some sources and encourage anyone who reads Portuguese to help add to the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per above. Also, quite old articles in Spanish and Portuguese exist for a long time. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 10:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural keep No valid reason for deletion presented by nominator. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:15, 5 March 2016 (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.