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. Don't usually close on 2 but I'm 95% sure the next relist would only result in another keep so no point dragging it on. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 ^Talk 01:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Paula Schneider (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

fails WP:GNG. unsourced BLP The Banner  talk 06:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 08:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bolivia-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 08:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete My news sweeps did not turn up WP:RS.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 22:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC) Changing to Keep as per Dravecky weigh-in below.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 11:05, 8 August 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep as subject appears to cross the verifiability and notability thresholds with coverage in third-party reliable sources ( [1], [2], [3], [4], etc.). - Dravecky ( talk) 09:21, 8 August 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.