Deletion of Catherine Slessor

Comment: per . She is an MBE specifically for  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/528696/birthday_honours_list_prime_ministers_list_2016.pdf "services to Architectural Journalism". (p. 80) —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:JOURNALIST)

Comment: I'm a bit confused here as a lot of what's being stated is totally unsubstantiated by independent sources. Virtually nothing that anyone has included is independent (including the piece written by her own colleague.) I would expect for someone so "prominent" in their field, there'd be readily available sources to support such statements. As far as the NACADEMIC claim, I'd suggest revisiting that statement because that's a massive stretch. This is definitely borderline at this point and I'll gladly withdraw but |independent sources absolutely need to be added
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:IRS)

Comment: per nomination and failure of  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO||WP:BASIC)

Comment: I have looked at ''Architectural Review'' again. While it's true that it's not an academic journal, it was indexed by Scopus during the time that Slessor was editor. Many notable people have edited it or contributed to it. It does seem to be an influential and respected publication in the field of architecture and urban design. (I note also that some titles which Wikipedia considers magazines, Scopus considers journals, and vice versa, although that is not the case with ''Architectural Review''). I don't know how we find sources, other than book reviews, from within her field that are totally independent, but there is a tribute to her in another architectural magazine/journal, and, in ''Architectural Review'', tributes from such notable people within her fields (architecture/architectural writing) as Norman Foster, Baron Foster of Thames Bank|Norman Foster, Nicholas Grimshaw, Tom Dyckhoff, Sou Fujimoto, Hugh Pearman (architecture critic)|Hugh Pearman, and Roger Zogolovitch. I have found reviews of all four of her books named in the article, and I have added those references.  If being a respected editor of a notable magazine is not sufficient, she certainly meets 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NAUTHOR)

Comment: agree with {{u|RebeccaGreen}}, and IMO, she meet some criteria for , So my vote was Keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: Architectural Review'' has been published since 1896; Slessor has been its editor (I have just added as a reference 'Catherine Slessor: a trailblazer in male-dominated industries.': "As the editorial torch is passed, we look back at the career of Catherine Slessor and the AR under her leadership." (Tom Wilkinson, ''The Architectural Review'', 2015)). She therefore meets  #8 "The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area." (She may meet other criteria too, but only one is needed.) Note that  states: "This guideline is ''independent'' from the other subject-specific notability guidelines, such as WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:AUTH etc. and is explicitly listed as an alternative to the general notability guideline." The article could certainly be expanded, but the subject does meet notability requirements
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC||WP:NACADEMIC)