Deletion of Althia Raj

Comment: Per , "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors." Her work is regularly cited by other news organizations that she is independent from. Additionally, she passes  for "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:JOURNALIST||WP:GNG)

Comment: without prejudice against recreation if somebody can reference it better than this. The references are a press release from the ''Huffington Post'' on a press release distribution platform, the |primary source directory ''of'' her own writing for the ''Huffington Post'', an "our contributors" blurb on the website of a TV show she's a contributor to, and a Q&A interview on a |blog — which means that exactly none of them represent media coverage ''about'' her in |reliable sources that are ''independent'' of her, because the ones that are reliable aren't independent of her and the one that's independent of her isn't reliable. A person does not get a Wikipedia article by having "coverage" from her own employers in staff profiles and press releases, or by getting interviewed by bloggers — she has to be the ''subject'' of reliable source coverage in real media ''other'' than her own employers to clear , and no journalist (no, not even Rosemary Barton) can ever make any notability claim at all that "inherently" ''exempts'' her from having to have that reliable source coverage just because her own employers' websites technically verify that she exists. Regardless of what a journalist's notability ''claim'' is, it's not the ''making'' of the claim that gets her over , but the quality of the ''sourcing'' that can be provided to ''support'' the claim — but blogs and staff "coverage" from her own employers don't cut it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:BLOGS||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:JOURNALIST)