Deletion of Mary G. Enig

Comment: to Weston A. Price Foundation. I don't really see her fulfilling , but as Gregwebs said, most of her work is associated with that foundation. A small section on that page about her background would probably do just fine. &mdash
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: Agree that this is a non-notable, fringe figure without coverage by |reliable sources.  The article ends up being primarily a comprehensive repository for her articles with little mention of how out of the mainstream they are
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: I can't find any |reliable sources that would support her inclusion either.  and  both seem to demand her exclusion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:PROF)

Comment: While I do not think she passes  criterion #1, I do think she meets the more general  based on the analysis by John Z. Also, an argument can be made that she meets  criterion #7 (substantial impact outside academia in academic capacity). Her position regarding saturated fats versus trans-fats is increasingly becoming more accepted, as are other of her long-standing claims (the cholesterol myth). Regardless, there is enough coverage to justify keeping the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: Fails , 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:PROF)

Comment: There are no substantial, reliable, independent sources.  Almost everything availible about her was either a) written by her or b) in blogs or other unreliable sources.  She has a job, and has published articles in a few journals, and published a few books.  Having a job where you write things that get published sometimes has never been a baseline for inclusion in Wikipedia.  This person seems to fail both the |general notability test for lacking any substantial, independent, reliable writing about her life, and fails the  test as well, for showing no evidence of passing that guideline either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PROF)

Comment: Due to the fact that this person has received scant mention by reliable sources, how do you propose to overcome the fact that this article presents only her non-mainstream views and nutritional advice without citing any reliable sources? If you are voting to keep the article, could you please improve it with citations from |reliable sources rather than just vote to keep the article as is?  It seems to me that her numerous WAPF articles and overall influenence in the field of nutrition have not been deemed significant enough for reliable sources to even bother to comment on them.  Why should Wikipedia give her and her views an uncontested article?   In my opinion, this article should be deleted if it were to stay as is.  However I would support her biographical information being incorporated into the Weston A. Price Foundation article in the same mannor as the co-founder, Sally Fallon
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)