Deletion of Hilary Cunningham Scharper

Comment: Passes , per Megalibrarygirl and David Eppstein
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: Regardless of whether the ''Toronto Star'' is too "local" to help establish notability for a writer (which I ''don't'' agree that it is, but that's not the point), there are numerous other valid |reliable sources here now for which that question doesn't even exist to be up for debate in the first place
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Thank you for your changes, but I'm afraid she still doesn't meet 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: The only  criteria this article plausibly meets is the following
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: passes  as shown by the additional reliable sources added to the article since its nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NAUTHOR)

Comment: Multiple published reviews of multiple books in major national newspapers (and Publishers Weekly) is a clear pass of . And while the Star might plausibly be discounted as too local,  says nothing about locality, and that's not true of the Globe and Mail (it's a national paper regardless of where its head office is) nor of the other papers from nowhere near Toronto
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR||WP:BKCRIT)