Deletion of John W. Ayers

Comment: I think there's a narrow pass of #C1 and a respectable case for #C7. The topics he has chosen to research are natural fodder for churnalism and clickbait (my list above really only winnowed the worst of a standard "news" search), but a decent fraction of what I turned up was acceptably in-depth. I think it's at the point where we ''should'' say something about him, and we can do the reading public a service by writing something that's ''better'' than what the churnalism serves up
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF)

Comment: His citation counts (three pubs with over 100 each in https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6WKOpCEAAAAJ his Google scholar profile) gives him a borderline pass of #C1. If that were all I might only give this a weak keep. But the media search above by XOR, even after filtering out half of the results as being low-quality press-release reprinters, gives enough media attention giving in-depth coverage to his research to give a good case for #C7 as well
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)