Deletion of Wilma Pang (2nd nomination)

Comment: fails , minimal  coverage, of very limited geographical scope (with some rather unreliable sources prominently cited in the article) does not suggest the  is met
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: article has issues, including focus on a a small scale controversy rather than subject, but is not mostly known for the scandal - I support moving material of the scandal to the mayoral race article and link form that to this article. Plenty of academic and reliable news sources back notability as a musician, an academic, and an aspiring  politician. She is certainly more notable than almost anyone in {{c|Pornographic film actors}}, with a fe notable (har-har) exceptions. This is an easy keep under , and there are multiple sources galore. AfD is not to fix quality issues
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Read .  She clearly meets it.  In addition to that, she doesn't just get cover for her race for mayor.  You see additional coverage as they quote her as an expert on Chinese related things. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/05/08/MN31391.DTL http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-04-15/bay-area/17420312_1_fong-s-appointment-heather-fong-police-force
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN)