Deletion of Vincent Rougeau

Comment: obviously meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: per  and . Dean of a leading law school and a major independent college
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY||WP:PROF)

Comment: per the above comments. It is pretty clear from what's in the article already that #C6 is satisfied on several counts. Moreover, a GNews search shows plenty of newscoverage as well, so likely passes  too. It also seems clear that the nominator is not well familiar with the deletion process and they would be well advised to ease off with Special:NewPagesFeed for a while
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: both per blatant failure of nominator to perform  and for a nomination statement that does not even address the appropriate notability criterion, . This is a brand-new article, not in great shape as nominated, but . Subject appears to pass #C6 both as head of a major scholarly association and as head of a notable institution of higher learning. Notability in general does not require sources to be non-primary (although for  they should be independent, reliable, and in-depth) and  does not even require them to be independent. And in this case, independent reliable secondary sources appear plentiful in Google News searches
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:PROF||WP:DINC||WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:PROF)

Comment: has the nominator carried out efore and looked for sources that are not primary
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)