Deletion of Dvora Bochman

Comment: First thank to everyone here on the helpful comments on this article which has been been improved per the AFD notice, by sourcing all the facts which are not considered common knowledge on the subject, such as Exhibitions, Stamp issues per Cavarrone's comment. Though the deletion notice fails to show sufficient efore or an understanding of  a legitimate concern has been raised by another. As Such I have edited the article to better indicate that the subject's complies with rtist. '''Unfortunately most of this work has been deleted because some sources were not available online....''' I therefore refer to a historic version of this article: at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dvora_Bochman&oldid=543217301 which contains information showing compliance with rtist as well as . Here is a breakdown of the '''facts
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B||WP:GNG||WP:A)

Comment: Haven't looked at the sources, so she may or may not be notable.  But there are clearly additional https://www.google.com/search?q=%D7%93%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94+%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A6%27%D7%9E%D7%9F%E2%80%8E&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a ghits in Hebrew.  And of course we don't determine notability by number of ghits.  ''See'' .   Also -- the person must be notable by wp standards.  Not, as nom suggests is the standard, "great and important
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:GOOGLEHITS)

Comment: Per . Artist without any significant critical attention, no evidence that her work is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. Not known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ARTIST)