Deletion of Ieshia Evans

Comment: to be about the image rather than the person. |Significant coverage in reliable sources exists that treats the photo as the subject – for example in https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/11/baton-rouge-protester-photo-iesha-evans ''The Guardian'', http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/07/a-single-photo-that-captures-race-and-policing-in-america/490664/ ''The Atlantic'', http://www.wnyc.org/story/unrest-baton-rouge/ WNYC, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ieshia-evans-woman-iconic-baton-rouge-police-protests-photo-speaks-out/ CBS, http://www.reuters.com/article/rpb-icprecap-idUSKBN13V2O1 Reuters, and http://madame.lefigaro.fr/societe/la-femme-de-baton-rouge-lhistoire-derriere-la-photo-iconique-180716-115429 ''Le Figaro'' – whereas coverage about the person is less in-depth. Even appearing in the http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38028755 BBC's 100 Women mainly supports notability for this one event – {{tq||The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person}}. The photo itself doesn't appear to be titled, so I suggest renaming the article simply '''Image of Ieshia Evans
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:1E)

Comment: subject of an iconic image, with sufficient press to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: but the article should be moved to a title making it about the photo. The news coverage is considerable, international, and enduring: the photo was taken in July and I just found coverage from November. I believe it squeaks by under the |general notability guideline as a viral phenomenon, but it is not a biography
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)