Deletion of Lynika Strozier

Comment: I would like to point out (for whatever its worth) that the nominator has a grand total of 3 edits on Wikipedia at this time, all of which are connected to this AFD. I don't know about you, but the first three edits I made to Wikipedia certainly weren't to delete something. The article should be kept because the person clearly meets . I implore the nominator to go create some content instead of starting your Wikipedia career with a deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The subject of the article meets general notability criteria 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Calling for an early closure as per .  The only delete here is from the nominator, and the nominator is a |single purpose account, created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RandomEditor7623 solely for this nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW||WP:SPA)

Comment: per , rather than 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PROF)

Comment: Fails , however she had a full profile back in 2012 in the Chicago Tribune, some additional non-trivial coverage in the interim, and very significant obit publishing (New York Times, The Scientist, many Chicago outlets including TV). Absent the significant obit publishing she probably wouldn't have passed GNG, as a single in-depth item is not sufficient. With the obit carried so widely, this is probably just over the threshold of GNG
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSCHOLAR)

Comment: Not notable under  perhaps, but is notable by virtue of independant sources being available
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)