Deletion of Jemma Green

Comment: She passes neither  (too low citation count, no major awards, etc) nor  (elected office is too minor). And the sources we have for her, while perhaps adequate for the factual detail they source, do not provide the high profile, editorial independence, and depth of coverage of the subject that I would expect for . I am sympathetic to the case that we should have better coverage of female scientists on Wikipedia, but the way to do that is to write articles about the many significant female scientists who are still missing from Wikipedia, not to try to prop up the insignificant ones
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:POLITICIAN||WP:GNG)

Comment: I have reason to believe the nominator's rationale is  and I am trying to follow this up off-wiki
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE)

Comment: as an cademic. She has made a name for herself since her fellowship at Curtin University researching and writing about energy, infrastructure, climate change, and sustainability - and her work has been cited in https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Jemma+Green%22 scholarly articles and in https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Jemma+Green%22 some books. There are https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Jemma+Green%22&tbm=nws 162 (click on page 17) articles from a search on news... and these seem to be mostly about this Jemma Green. She also garners speaking engagements on these topics. I would feel stronger if there were more publications that reference her work and greater industry / media recognition in terms of awards, etc
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: Wikipedia is not a venue for publishing promotional bios of minor |politicions. Lacks coverage about her in independent reliable sources. No sign of passing WP:PROF
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)