Deletion of Candice Kumai

Comment: Reviews do not not establish notability as they fall under outine. Additionally, even if the book were notable it would not confer that notability onto to its author per otability is not inherited
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirect (WP:R||WP:N)

Comment: Sources include http://www.eonline.com/news/534606/chef-candice-kumai-s-favorite-healthy-juice-smoothie-recipes-for-earth-day in-depth here and http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-dish-chef-and-food-editor-candice-kumai-clean-green-eats/ in-depth here and http://www.thepacker.com/news/d%E2%80%99arrigo-chef-team-broccoli-rabe-nyc-tour here and https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/what-healthy-chef-and-former-model-candice-kumai-122201290707.html in-depth here and http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/ex-top-chef-contestant-candice-kumai-dishes-best-foods-pregnancy-article-1.1468541 in-depth here and http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/candice-kumai-shows-cook-sexy-article-1.1185533 here. That said, the current article could be improved, but that is not grounds for deletion, since she easily meets the |general notability guideline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: u|Jerem43}}, a "critical review" does not have to be a scholarly treatment of the subject. Reviews in the NY Times for example, are acceptable. Reviews in the news, magazines or journals are hardly "routine": only books that receive significant attention for various reasons are reviewed--I know: I'm a librarian. BTW, the term "critical attention" is not mentioned once on otability, nor is it specifically defined in AUTHOR, leaving it to the AfD participants to weigh and evaluate the info provided. Anyway, that's a little off-topic, but I think important to clarify. The subject of this article passes GNG for coverage under reliable sources which I added to the article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NAUTHOR)