Deletion of Lenka Kotková

Comment: That is the problem with academics – there is just not that much information out there on them.  However, I was able to establish some otability|Notability for Ms. Kotková by going to Google Scholar.  As we can see here http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Lenka+Kotkov%C3%A1%22&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search,  Ms. Kotková has been involved with at least three scholarly works.  With at least one of her publications being cited by this source http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=100&hl=en&lr=&cites=3174264903035385111  which was in turn cited by 12 additional sources which included some of the highest regarded and respected Astrophysical journals.  I say that is enough to establish otability|Notability within her field
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: Seems to be notable to me. I don't think we have a specific policy for astronomer notability but I'd say discovering 200 asteroids qualifies. Some more sources would help her |verifiability though
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: pending source verification. For whatever it's worth, astronomy is a particularly squishy subject when it comes to notability because there are so many amateurs in the field with significant amounts of publication on the record. If the sources are verifiable, a soupçon of  is called for
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR)

Comment: per Vickers. It's unfortunate that every little hockey player that played two minutes in the NHL gets himself a whole Wikipedia article and this person has to go through an afd, but I guess there's no choice in the matter. There's no clear-cut line that can be drawn for academics, and we must analyze each academic on a case by case basis. Vickers has clearly established that there's no evidence that she's an important figure of her area of study thus not meeting the  notability standard
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)