Deletion of Nadia Bolz-Weber (2nd nomination)

Comment: I added a lot of new sources. Total of 5 book reviews (per  #3 "multiple reviews") + 7 GNG sources. In addition a couple of the sources make direct assertions of notability. I'll quote them if requested, they should be quoted in the article anyway
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: caveat: I declined the G4 speedy deletion due to the presence of new sources since the last discussion.) The current version of the article references extensive write-ups in four publications which all meet the criteria for |reliable sources. They clearly cover more than one event (you've got coverage of her theology, her publications, her former careers as a comedian and weightlifter, her tattoos, her Red Rock Ampitheatre sermon and more), and they're all fairly in-depth. You've therefore got significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources - that's the textbook definition of notability. I won't deny that the page needs a lot of expansion, but deletion? Not at all
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: for all the same reasons as the last AfD. Of the "new sources," two (the UK Daily Mail tabloid, and a press release for her book) are not . The ''Washington Post'' article doesn't seem to establish notability either. -- Special:Contributions/101.119.14.212|101.119.14.212
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)