Deletion of Eleanor Beardsley

Comment: The relevant guideline here is . Merely being a correspondent for a major organisation is insufficient. We need some evidence that this individual is notable in their own right
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: that the article is reliably and verifiably sourced.  I just added a little info, some more sources, but, overall, that IP has a point: this is a article readers expect to find on Wikipedia. IMO, that makes it the sort of article we should keep.   And searches show that her work is widely cited in books and (non-NPR) articles, meeting  #1.) :  "is widely cited by peers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:JOURNALIST)

Comment: Nom is throwing up too many articles at AFD, too fast to have performed .  As
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Beardsley's prodigous output (more than a thousand articles on HighBeam, for instance) makes it difficult to filter out the things written ''by'' her to find things written ''about'' her. However, paging through the citations of her work on Google Scholar, InfoTRAC, etc., makes a persuassive case that she meets  criterion 1: "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:JOURNALIST)