Deletion of Mika Tosca

Comment: Fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: Although I myself voted KEEP, I want to bring to your attention that this editor may have a , because she kept reverting my edit of the name addition "Michael Tosca" which I added as an additional birthname. 2 of the sources are using this name. Please feel free to discuss in the TALK page why this should not be added
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: It sounds like there is a good consensus the subject does not pass  which I agree with. For GNG, six sources have come up. Two are non-independent, one is a passing mention, one seems plausible and two might be, but are extremely local in ways that might not be initially apparent. The EOS article is written by the subject and the coverage at phys.org is a mirror of a press release put out by NASA when the subject was employed by the organization. Buzzfeed quotes the subject as an example of 1,600 different scientists who signed an open letter. The Scientist has some more in depth coverage of the subject and should probably count towards GNG. Medhill is a student paper at Northwestern 15 blocks from SIAC where the subject works. The PBS profile seems to actually an interview with the local PBS affiliate WTTW (the author, Paul Caine, works for WTTW and that's the only place I could find the story). To me it comes down to whether the local TV interview and/or student article from Northwestern are enough, in combination with the coverage in The Scientist, to satisfy GNG
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Whilst I agree citations alone are definitely insufficient to pass , I think science communication work pushes the article over the threshold to notability. As an aside, we probably need a better guideline for science communicators one day
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF)

Comment: Hello! I'm not the original author of this page, but I am a college faculty member who led a class this semester in which students profiled scientists of underrepresented backgrounds who they believed merited a biography page on wikipedia; one of my students wrote and submitted this page as their project.  (I should note that I am new to wikipedia, so I'm not sure that I'm allowed to begin this bullet with "point of clarification" - thanks for your patience with any transgressions and feel free to correct me.) With regards to this nomination for deletion, I would perhaps argue that this person's notability could be somewhat falling through the cracks of #1 and #7 on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics).  My view is that covering one of the highest profile trans climate scientists in the US makes this biography notable on its own, though I understand that it doesn't necessary map to clear-cut notability along one of the 8 possible criteria.  In terms of #1, I agree that this person's climate work alone is probably  but that her niche as a "climate scientist who now does academic work with artists" is cutting-edge and novel in her field and thus "notable" in the sense that it is on the vanguard.  Unique and interdisciplinary science and science communication isn't necessarily quantified by one of the 8 notability requirements directly, but we also have evidence that discounting more unconventional forms of academic success/outreach bias Wikipedia against scientists from underrepresented groups. Thanks for reading, and looking forward to learning more
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: I also wanted to mention , because with the additions that have now happened, "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability."  There are now two in-depth sources (''PBS'' and ''Medill Reports'') that focus on Tosca in the Career section, and the ''PBS'' profile offers commentary on her career shift, which seems to help support / for becoming "known for originating a significant new concept." In the newly-created Advocacy section, it also appears that Tosca is not , because she has given "one or more scheduled interviews to a notable publication" and has "participated in an attention-seeking manner in publicity for ... a cause
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:AUTHOR||WP:CREATIVE||WP:LOWPROFILE)

Comment: I have added more sources to the article in support of  and  notability, and to help show that Tosca is not , including additional scheduled interviews
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BASIC||WP:LOWPROFILE)