Deletion of Laura Mersini-Houghton

Comment: Fails , with a low h-index, and no other indicators of notability. In addition, the article has a severe case of Wikipuffery, with some serious exaggeration of the novelty of the subject's research. -- Special:Contributions/101.117.88.62|101.117.88.62
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Closing admin, please note that during the deletion review, this article was revamped to a https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Laura_Mersini-Houghton&oldid=615809867 solid article with good references; then User:Holybeef https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Laura_Mersini-Houghton&diff=615814327&oldid=615809867 reverted the improvements, restored the COI/OR tags, against the spirit of , to return the article to this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Laura_Mersini-Houghton&oldid=615814327 flawed version, apparently fixated on deleting the earlier (flawed) article while preventing contributors from trying to fix it. Please consider the improved version in your review, thank you
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEYMANN)

Comment: Msrasnw suggests a h-index of 15, but that's still below the threshold of notability. Historically, we've drawn the threshold at about 20, or somewhat lower in low-citation fields (which theoretical physics is not). I see no other grounds for passing  either. The "associate professor" issue is a red herring: being a tenured professor has '''never''' been grounds for passing . Instead, we have the criteria C1 to C9 in that policy, none of which are applicable to the subject. The alternative road to notability is , but that isn't passed either. -- Special:Contributions/101.117.108.115|101.117.108.115
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: although I agree the current article is in sad shape, poorly referenced, original research, badly done. Indications of notability in the pageviews (see last 90 days) plus quick google search. Will try to improve but next few days I have to paint, work, oversee gas installation, etc. Indications are strong she meets the GNG which prevails over the  (but if I find otherwise I'll redo my vote
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Although a GS h-index of 15 is marginal to pass rof in a highly cited field. A bit too early. I have to say that I don't like the tone of the nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)