Deletion of Deidre Willmott

Comment: Appears to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Appears to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: this article and the behaviour around it suggests a  is trying to remove an article related to FMG - and I fail to see adequate reasoning behind above arguments regarding notability - the local context is clear (although not to the delete arguments - but that is another story) - and really the various other methods of trying to remove the article suggest ulterior motives - also I do not endorse this Afd or the arguments being used - specially refactoring a comment I made elsewhere is simply not adequate, I have removed it and do not endorse the 'lifting'' of editors comments from one talk page to an afd page without the slightest consultation
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA)

Comment: fails : an un-elected run-of-the-mill high-level civil servant. Besides, WP is not for posting |résumés
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:RESUME)

Comment: This subject doesn't pass  requirements of substantial coverage. She comes closest under , but that coverage doesn't approach even substantial local coverage standards. I think  speaks to her best claim of notability. The rest doesn't amount to notable activity, and while it might fit in an otherwise notable BLP, a |well-documented education and career alone don't pass the test
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:POLITICIAN||WP:BLP1E||WP:LOTSOFSOURCES)

Comment: Looks like an easy one to me - pretty non-notable career; nothing which comes close on  or any senior role in a firm that satisfies .  Can't quite understand the "Keep" rationale myself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:CORP)