Deletion of Linda Harasim

Comment: per Xxanthippe, David Eppstein. I gently remind the nominator of , particularly item 9
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: GS cites are 1203, 430, 428, 398, 351, 195 etc. etc. h index = 23. Clear pass of rof #1. Poorly researched nominations waste the time of editors
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: As Xxanthippe says, she clearly passes  #1, and there seems to be http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22linda+harasim%22 plenty of news material in major international news publishers to use to source an article about here. Much of it involves quoting her as an expert ( #7; see note 14) but others have more substantive material about her; http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/edurpt/estories/er131202.htm this Australian Broadcast Network piece is an interview with her, and http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=165152&sectioncode=26 this Times Higher Education piece is about an incident that led to her resignation from TeleLearning, for instance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)