Deletion of Nina Pierpont

Comment: When 'legitimate' and 'suppression of the truth' are brought into an argument, I tend to look for the angle... Whatever the 'truth' here, Wikipedia is not a vehicle (leaded or unleaded) for campaigning. It is the notability of the article subject that counts, not the justice of it, or the honesty of the campaigner. I am concerned that all the references appear to be from windturbinesyndrome.com, which I find hard to believe is a neutral third party source. (I haven't managed to get into these references yet - they don't seem to want to load.) The publication mentioned is not yet published, bringing  into play, possibly
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: non-notable ringe theories|fringe theorist, promotional
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Non-free content (WP:F)

Comment: Lacks |reliable sources to show notability. There is a related AfD about the article on Wind Turbine Syndrome, which has the same problems. All the external links included here are to an activist website. If any of this material had survived the conventional scientific publication process, it would be more credible
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)