Deletion of Kate Raphael Bender

Comment: It is still essentially . The second "notable" act isn't all that notable. It was a boycott (big deal) carried in a small paper. But that article was more about the org than her. Being the spokesperson/organizer for the org gets your name mentioned, but the boycott isn't yours, it's the orgs boycott
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: to something but definitely not delete.  I would only support a keep if more independent sources were found.  This seems like a bit of an example of .  This source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/01/17/MNG9NARFJT1.DTL, which is already on the article, has detailed coverage.  There are other sources that cover her in detail too.  However, they seem to be recycled press-releases from the International Solidarity Movement so I think there is some question of whether such sources are independent or not.  I'm not sure whether these sources should be counted in establishing notability--if they are counted I would say she is solidly notable.  Otherwise (and I am leaning this way) I would say she probably isn't, and the content should be merged somewhere...merged, not deleted, because that sfgate article makes the core event--her getting deported for her protests--verifiable.  I think the event belongs somewhere on wikipedia
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: not a notable person.  However, if the article does stay, I will insist that  rules be strictly enforced
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CENSOR)