Deletion of Jennie Allen

Comment: notability has nothing to do with the legitimacy, goodness, or importance of someone's work or beliefs; it's about fame and recognition in |reliable sources. The subject of this stub (article) seems to have organized a single conference; I don't see how that passes either  or  more generally.  Her books have not been best-sellers, nor have they been reviewed extensively by the critics, so she fails ; she might |barely pass with |the newly added sources.  I think the |past consensus is that an article should '''not''' be deleted '''merely''' because |the subject edited their own article; normally we just tag it for |conflict of interest, warn the user, and edit out the |peacock lanague and cruft.  However, human beings can't always be objective about themselves
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:BLP1E||WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR||WP:BARE||WP:HEY||WP:OUTCOMES||WP:AUTOBIO||WP:COI||WP:PEACOCK)

Comment: no evidence of meeting  or . Created by the author herself from the looks of the username, and creator is an . Seems like a blatant attempt to use WP to promote herself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR||WP:SPA)