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 delete. Cirt (talk) 06:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Renata Kuerten (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails basic coverage guidelines. This is one of those articles that's gotten leeway because of a Vogue cover, but a cover of Vogue doesn't equate to existence of coverage, which I can't find and has yet to be offered after over two years. The article is basically just a directory entry with little apparent chance of expansion into a proper encyclopedic article; models.com and nymag.com (two popular and exhaustive modeling resources) return zero results on her.  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 21:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Apparently fails WP:BIO; I can't find any sources either. Sophus Bie ^(talk) 23:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I contested speedy deletion of this article based on the Vogue cover, which is enough to get past WP:CSD#A7, but I can't see in any of the Google News archive results linked above much more than passing mentions and a paragraph or two about the Vogue appearance. If anyone with better knowledge of Portuguese than I have (on a quick count I make it about my tenth language) can contradict that then I'll be happy to reconsider. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:59, 1 October 2009 (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.