Deletion of Tabetha S. Boyajian

Comment: As stated above It passes , does not need to pass  and using multiple sources it can pass . Special:Contributions/184.147.22.3|184.147.22.3
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: or redirect. The minor academic-administrative work listed by 184.146.181.133 does not imply notability. The article is mostly sourced by press release. The subject does not pass any criterion of . And the media blip about her discovery fails  and . The nominator's withdraw message cannot be used for a speedy close because there are dissenting opinions. The nominator's sarcastic message that we have to ignore all our notability precedents because aliens seems an accurate assessment of the discussion above, but that's not the same as having a policy-based reason for a keep
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:BIO1E)

Comment: per David Eppstein. At best a  case. Postdocs essentially never pass  and are not notable unless they can pass  on some non-academic related grounds
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO1E||WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: The article is currently  on a single paper that is evidently not even published yet. (And I agree that the "Tabby's Star" bit is irrelevant.) That said, Boyajian ''does'' have a list of accomplishments in astronomy amounting to an h-index of 16 &ndash; this is somewhat borderline for the subject. I think the most accurate characterization of her is an extremely-promising post-doc
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)