Deletion of Judith Bailey

Comment: Passes #C6 as argued above. Notability is not temporary; ''having held'' these positions is sufficient. In academic biographies, sources affiliated with the subject (e.g., websites of the universities where they studied or worked) are considered reliable for claims not likely to be challenged (e.g., the years when they studied or worked there
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: for nom {{re|Salvidrim!}} FYI, determining notability for academics () can be a little tricky. They can be highly notable or famed in their field, yet not receive much coverage about their lives in the general press, so thus seemingly fail .  President or chancellor of a university is an extremely prestigious and influential position and typically only comes after a long career, so thus it automatically merits notability on its own (though these people always have a lot of news articles, including when they come and go from their posts, especially at public universities). Also for the future, you have to look for sources before you do an AfD — the fact that before there were only primary sources doesn't mean anything at all, because other sources were plentiful
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMICS||WP:42)

Comment: president of not one but two universities, therefore meets item No. 6 of ; additionally there are quite a few articles about her
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)