Deletion of Tracie D. Hall

Comment: What, exactly, is the rationale by which the executive director of https://web.archive.org/web/20171111163603/https://www.webcitation.org/5kwKCy7XB?url=http%3A%2F%2Fencarta.msn.com%2Fencnet%2Frefpages%2FRefArticle.aspx%3Frefid%3D761563357 the oldest and largest library association in the world non-notable?  I do understand that notability is not inherited, but I would think that the executive director of an organization dedicated to collecting and documenting sources would, by the very definition, be someone for whom there were many documented sources.  She has published multiple articles in https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/authors/tracie-d-hall/ American Libraries magazine, which is associated with the organization she heads, but also she has published articles there going back prior to her appointment as Executive Director.  https://www.library.ucsb.edu/news/qa-tracie-d-hall-91-alas-new-executive-director UC Santa Barbara's library did an interview with her.  https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/libraries/article/83527-pw-talks-with-ala-executive-director-tracie-d-hall.html So did Publisher's Weekly.  https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6GtBNPoAAAAJ&hl=en Google Scholar has a losting of 6 published scholarly articles.  I find this AfD puzzling as there is no rationale given and no indication that the nominator followed 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: The interviews and book chapter linked above, and PW article about her hiring, give enough in-depth coverage for  for me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)