Deletion of Denise Stephens

Comment: Passes #C1 at the very least
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: per scope_creep. I do not agree with BrownHairedGirl's football/pornstar analogies – though certainly Wikipedia and the media in general have systematic biases favouring men, the arguments made seem to be more in favour of policy changes than relevant to this particular discussion. However, I think Stephens has just about received significant coverage in the ''Salt Lake Tribune'', ''Daily Herald'' and ''Wall Street Journal'' articles (though I can't read the paywalled WSJ source) and I understand her citation count makes her notable (though  says "Citation measures such as the h-index, g-index, etc., are of limited usefulness" so I'm not sure whether the h-index of 22 is particularly relevant
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF)

Comment: Passes  (just) per articlehttp://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=5266333&itype=CMSID about her leading undergraduate students to discover a planet.And note the massive systemic bias underpinning this nomination. If Stephens was a male professional footballer, then  her notability would be ''automatic'' per  even if her only professional appearance was a few minutes as a substitute in a single game.  If she was a porn star, then she'd be an automatic keep per #2 for her unique contribution.In this case, Stephens has been employed as a professional academic in major university for over ten years, which is way more than the notability threshold for footballers. Yet we still have a call to delete the article. '''Boggle'''.Are we here to build an encyclopedia? Or to run a fanzine for football fans and porn users
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFOOTY||WP:PORNBIO)

Comment: She passes  and subsequently , with a citation number of 1806 and an H-index of 22. WP:SNOW keep close
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:BIO)