Deletion of Hilda Clayton

Comment: She's just a non-notable soldier who died in a training accident; fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER)

Comment: My reading of  is that it says we shouldn't normally have articles for ''both'' the person and the event if the person isn't independently notable. Something here pretty clearly passes the  (I've added references from ''Time'', ''The New York Times'' and the BBC for good measure) and we don't have an article for the event, which in any case would be difficult to give a title to. So, I think an article about the person makes perfect sense
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO1E||WP:GNG)

Comment: The seeming-to-be-growing meme that "Fails , everything else is irrelevant" needs to be nipped in the bud. '''' is passed, and that answer is enough
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER||WP:GNG)

Comment: Many RS picked up the story, and it received international attention.  is a red herring; nobody is saying she had high rank or significant command responsibility or won a medal for valor. That's the typical application of SOLDIER. However, even SOLDIER says, "If, for instance, there is enough information in reliable sources to include details about a person's birth, personal life, education and military career, then they most likely warrant a stand-alone article." Secondary sources tell us when and where she was born and her high school; other sources add that she majored in business studies and cosmetology at Augusta Technical College; she graduated from the Defense Information School and went to the 55th Signal Company. She may not be a scholar or an extraordinary tactian, but there details about her education and military career. We are told who she married; is that enough personal life? Mortee hits the problem with  on the nose: if there is an article about the event, then BIO1E says there doesn't need to be an article about the person. The first paragraph of BIO1E suggests that in this (atypical) case, the article should be about the person rather than the event. The event is not the typical soldier was killed by an IED or a faulty mortar round. The event is not just about the photograph. We have a woman soldier who took a picture of the mortar accident that killed her. She is intertwined with the event. It's not often that a photograph captures the moment, and in this event the photographer captures her own death. It's also not clear that Clayton disappears from view after this one event. Army.mil states, "Combat Camera further honored Clayton by naming the award for the winner of its annual best combat camera competition after her." That means her name may be coming up every so often. On top of that, it is likely that books about the Afgan war and combat photography will include the photograph and its story
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SOLDIER||WP:BIO1E)