Deletion of Lori Mattix

Comment: I think there are a few problems with deletion request. ''First'', the "gotta give both sides" issue mentioned above can be fixed by including the above-mentioned source; deletion is not required to solve this problem.''Second'', the issue of "she didn't refer to it as rape" isn't really a ''side'' left out of the discussion because the article only discusses the ''legal'' analysis of the rape. Statutory rape, in the United States, does not factor in the victim's perception of the events or whether nominal consent was given. Therefore, Ms. Mattix's perception of the events, and her claims that she consented have no bearing on whether ''statutory'' rape occurred. This would obviously be very different if forcible rape were being alleged, but it is not.''Third'', the  page allows articles for people who are famous for one reason IF the reason for which they are famous is independently notable. I think the Me Too movement is big enough to be considered notable on its own. The page says that an individual's article may be protected from deletion "because the single event she was associated with...was significant."''Fourth'', there are twenty-nine other articles in the  :Category:Groupies category that have ''not'' been deleted so I think it would be inconsistent to delete one when so many others remain
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: In trying to disentangle the various parts of the nomination, it seems like the nomination is basically confused about  (representing what is in reliable sources, good) and  (applying notability standards to article contents, bad). Nonetheless, focusing on the policy-based rationale for deletion (), it's obvious from a simple Google search that the subject has been covered by multiple RS over multiple events (with multiple people), so it's a pass of  that is not ruled out by . It's worth noting that the sole redirect !vote above does not suggest a specific target, and indeed can't, since multiple valid targets are supported by RS, precisely because it is not a  situation
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:NNC||WP:BLP1E||WP:GNG||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)