Deletion of Rhoda Jenkins

Comment: Per  which states ''"If a subject under discussion is independently notable, provide the evidence to show that''" and "''Ordinarily, a relative of a celebrity should only have their own independent article if and when it can be reliably sourced that they have done something significant and notable in their own right, and would thereby merit an independent article even if they didn't have a famous relative.''", merge any useful content of the article into Harriot Eaton Stanton Blatch and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. All sources I've found lack "''significant coverage''" stated in the  as ''"Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content.'' I cant find any source that covers her directly in http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Rhoda+Jenkins%22 here and http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Rhoda+Barney+Jenkins%22 here, which are google book results for Rhoda Jenkins and Rhoda Barney Jenkins, which are discussed previously. I cant even find a single source where she alone received significant coverage, apart from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0DEEDC113AF934A3575AC0A9619C8B63 this sad news. I'll be more than happy if someone can point a source that covers her accomplishments
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:GNG)

Comment: only sources cited in the article itself are for her parentage (one of them a paid-obit), and notability is . This also applies to being inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame for being a descendent of a famous suffragette. No evidence of "significant coverage" has been presented, nor achievements of sufficient significance to qualify for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:BIO)

Comment: The current version of the article reads like a memorial, and at first glance I was expecting to endorse the proposed deletion.  But a further search for sources reveals a surprisingly extensive amount of coverage about her, as shown at GNewshttp://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbs=ar%3A1&tbm=nws&q=rhoda+barney+jenkins&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&tbs=ar%3A1&tbm=nws&q=rhoda+jenkins+stanton&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq= and GBooks.http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=rhoda%20barney%20jenkins&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=ar:1,bks:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=np The NYT articles are examples (and I do not agree that the first one is mere "human interest" or that the second one is merely a mention "in passing") but as the search results demonstrate there is quite a lot more (much of it behind pay walls).  Rhoda Barney Jenkins may not have been a particularly notable architect, but all this coverage suggests that she may have been notable for her contributions to women's rights and history.  Or maybe some of this content should be merged to the too-short article about her Nora Stanton Blatch Barney|mother, or in some other way we could |preserve the information about her and her distinguished family.   At the very least, there is too much here for this content to disappear via the invisible prod process, without some community attention.  I'll be interested in other opinions from those who look through the potential sources
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE)