Deletion of Illiberal Reformers

Comment: GHits are untrustworthy per comment against Arnold Kling below. More than surpasses NBOOK#1 with coverage also in/at https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-progressive-history-of-eugenics-1456521508 WSJ, https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2016-06-13-0100/thomas-c-leonard-illiberal-reformers National Review, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2016-04-14/illiberal-reformers-race-eugenics-and-american-economics Foreign Affairs, http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/12/the-secret-history-of-the-mini Reason, https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-12-08/woodrow-wilson-wasn-t-the-only-progressive-racist Bloomberg View and https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-27/great-history-books-of-2016 BV again (...and then I found the http://scholar.princeton.edu/tleonard/illiberal-reformers author's page). Author is currently speedied, and as he doesn't appear to meet , merge or redirect would be a reasonable alternative
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC)

Comment: Meets  #1 with multiple reviews mentioned above and in the article. I'm not sure why the nominator says The New Republic doesn't count; it's a long-established and prominent magazine often cited in other media. And there is coverage in other sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BKCRIT)

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