Deletion of Emma Haruka Iwao

Comment: There is coverage at least 3 continents  but it is not a case of good sources as there is plenty, but it seems to be only for this one event. There is nothing outside it. So WP:BLP1E applies exactly. I also think it is a case of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: It's hard to imagine a situation that fits  more closely.  Coverage is fairly shallow, and is all in the context of this one event, which isn't even really notable enough to sustain its own article (although it certainly merits a mention in a few other places).  &ndash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: WP:BLP1E|BLP1E has been one of the most misunderstood and abused bits of policy in Wikipedia. In this case, we have it being misapplied to a public figure on the grounds that ''in the opinion'' of some Wikipedia editors, reliable sources are wrong to give this person coverage. Guinness World Records is wrong for conferring a record on this public figure. You're entitled to your opinion, but the key to how we make decisions is that we defer to the wisdom of sources. If the BBC, Guinness Records, NPR and so on, find this notable, then we follow suit, even if we disagree. Getting back to BLP1E, the policy is carefully written to explain that a series of boxes ''must'' be checked and ''only'' if ''every'' condition is met, then BLP1E's additional scrutiny applies. The key one here is ''low profile individual''. This is your typical private citizen. Non-celebrity. Non-activist. Non-performer. Non-public-facing worker. A regular person, who had the spotlight ''thrust upon them'', often because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. They got caught up in a major news event, were interviewed on TV, and went back to their obscure life. Iwao is Google's public face here. Google put her out there, publicized her work. She stepped forward in front of the camera, as part of her job, to do this publicity. Put aside your personal opinions on whether that is worthy of your attention. The simple fact is that is shows this is a public figure, someone who works in the public eye. Therefore, does not check all the boxes of BLP1E.When BLP1E doesn't apply, you fall through to the more broad criteria, , or simply . The quantity of coverage we see here, and the significance of a Guinness Record (i.e. ), are enough to meet those standards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:GNG||WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: A clear case of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: I'm not seeing any valid reason to delete.  applies only to people who are ''only'' notable for one event, usually an event that is itself notable enough for a standalone article (thus turning those articles into forks of each other). In this case, not only is 2019 record for calculation of pi unlikely to ever get its own article (and I don't see any other good merge target), but... {{tq|''If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event''}} is contradicted by the fact that she was being profiled by Japanese computing webzines years before the event, even just on a quick Google search.https://codezine.jp/article/detail/9684gihyo.jp/lifestyle/serial/01/it-study-meeting/0006 (And that doesn't include her multiple self-published books that presumably she wouldn't have kept writing if they didn't sell. Please note that I'm not saying any of these sources are useful for GNG, since one of them is an interview and the other is a summary of a presentation she made, along with those of several others.) {{tq|''If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual''}} seems highly unlikely, given Japan's propensity for immortalizing its own overseas innovators; the only way this could apply is if she actively came out and said "I don't want to be a public figure, please leave me alone and delete my Wikipedia article", which again seems unlikely given that she's been writing and publishing since she was a teenager. {{tq|''If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented''}} is (at least in the first part) slightly more compelling; none of the above "delete" !votes appear to have made the argument that this record is broken on a regular basis, and I don't know enough about the subject matter to say one way or the other. (Full disclosure: I'm here because I'm basically the only WIR member writing about Japanese women; I saw one other Japanese flag, clicked through, and saw it was a BLP of someone who recently did something that made her famous. If anything, this ''should'' make me biased in favour of deleting the article, for upholding our systemic bias against dead women relative to living women and Japanese women who lived in Japan as opposed to Japanese women who live in the US, Europe or Australia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Agree with the proposer,  is the most pertinent policy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: as , the 1E being a trivial achievement. No pass of rof or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:P||WP:GNG)