Deletion of Wendy van der Poel

Comment: Meets GNG, and . It's about coverage not about results. Enough references in newspapers. Selection of 8: https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1990-01-27/edition/0/page/19?query=Poel&sort=relevance 1, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1991-02-18/edition/0/page/13?query=Poel&sort=relevance 2, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1990-02-06/edition/0/page/17?query=Poel&sort=relevance 3, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1990-02-06/edition/0/page/17?query=Poel&sort=relevance 4, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LLC/1986-01-25/edition/0/page/15?query=Poel&sort=relevance 5, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1991-02-04/edition/0/page/15?query=Poel&sort=relevance 6, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LD/1989-01-21/edition/0/page/19?query=Poel&sort=relevance 7, https://leiden.courant.nu/issue/LLC/1991-02-23/edition/0/page/30 8
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)

Comment: per extensive coverage the Leidsch Dagblad. Nominator errs thrice: 1 List of newspapers in the Netherlands|This is a regional not a local newspaper 2 If it were local coverage -- something would be wrong with it. 3 Given the proof of , chooses to argue instead of withdrawing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)