Deletion of Cornelia Chase Brant

Comment: Passes  per Cunard. Further, the subject appears to be of importance to women's history within medicine in the United States. The New York Times description of her as a "pioneer" should be a clue to her importance within the field of women's studies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: per  and the sources listed by Cunard. Also a plausible case for #C6 as head of a standalone medical school (the existence of a board and a president of the board does not change this; C6 applies to, in business terms, the CEO, not the board of directors
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PROF)

Comment: Pre-internet subject, i.e. information is not likely to be digitized. This https://archive.org/details/ohiostatemedical3711ohio/page/199/mode/1up?q=%22Cornelia+Chase+Brant%22 review in the Ohio State Medical Journal of her biography indicates she was a pioneering woman x-ray specialist. That she was indeed involved in such work is confirmed https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044103011565&view=1up&seq=46&q1=Brant here, and https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044103011565&view=1up&seq=249&q1=Brant here, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044103011565&view=1up&seq=47&q1=Brant here. While the biography was written by family, https://archive.org/details/womeninmedicineb0000unse/page/205/mode/1up?q=Brant this review indicates it has a bibliography of secondary sources included. (I have no access to a library, but someone who does could easily verify that). Newspapers.com confirms there are 3,081 articles about "Cornelia Chase Brant" between 1908 and 1959; 1,195 for "Cornelia C. Brant" during the same period; 4,374 for "Dr. Cornelia Brant" over that period. Clearly we have sufficient evidence over time of her having been noted for both her club work and as a physician. For example https://bklyn.newspapers.com/clip/81045000/the-brooklyn-daily-eagle/, https://www.newspapers.com/clip/81044392/the-des-moines-register/,https://www.newspapers.com/clip/81044531/the-brooklyn-daily-eagle/ are all significant articles; whereas https://www.newspapers.com/clip/81045681/the-chat/ this (mentions that she was founder of a prominent social club) and https://www.newspapers.com/clip/81045702/the-standard-union/ this (confirms she was also a speaker and president of another social club) are less detailed. Bottom line we meet asic and probably weakly GNG
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)

Comment: The current stub is just a start.  There are plenty more sources out there including ''History of homeopathy and its institutions in America''; ''Women Doctors of the World'';  ''Women of Today''; ''Dream within her hand – Life of Dr. Cornelia Chase Brant''; ''A Vital Force: Women in American Homeopathy''; &c.   and  therefore apply "''Editors evaluating notability should consider not only any sources currently named in an article, but also the possibility or existence of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article. Thus, before proposing or nominating an article for deletion, or offering an opinion based on notability in a deletion discussion, editors are strongly encouraged to attempt to find sources ... If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NEXIST||WP:ATD)

Comment: Sources listed by Cunard would indicate that  are met
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Meets ,  and #C6, thanks to the excellent sources listed above supplied by {{u|Cunard}}, {{u|SusunW}} and others
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BASIC||WP:PROF)