Deletion of Amanda Baggs (2nd nomination)

Comment: I acknowledge and respect the privacy issue, but I don't think you've demonstrated that this case is "borderline".  Three independent CNN pieces do not = borderline.  Squarely within  and .  That is not the issue here.  thx
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:N)

Comment: per Jim Butler, and expand. As long as the article adheres to  standards and is correct there's no reason not to have it now that the notability criteria has been met
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: just being interviewed about your medical condition is not notability. There seems to be nothing beyond this interview, either; Google News Archive has nothing. Given there is no compelling reason to retain this article, 's presumption in favor of privacy seems to be appropriate here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: In April 2006, the CNN stuff didn't exist, nor (AFAIK) did any other good secondary source, so notability was at that time a valid concern.  The article could have been created and deleted a thousand times between then and now, but the new mass media cites change everything.  Now that the CNN article exists, the article passes WP's #The_primary_notability_criterion|primary notability criterion in exactly the same way other activists like Jim Sinclair and Sue Rubin do.   says ''A topic is notable if it has been the subject of at least one substantial or multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other.  ... (snip)... For example, several newspapers all publishing the same article from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works, while several researchers or journalists all doing their own research on a single subject and writing their own separate articles do constitute "multiple" sources''.  At CNN we have A. Chris Gajilanhttp://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/02/21/autism.amanda/index.html, Sanjay Gupta http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/blogs/paging.dr.gupta/2007/02/behind-veil-of-autism.html and Anderson Cooperhttp://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/ reporting separately.  Seems a pretty clear-cut keep to me, per . If the concern is about other issues, like privacy, then let's just discuss those.  thx
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: having an interview on CNN may count as non-trivial coverage in independent sources per ; however, more than one external source is ideally needed. Delete unless sources are added. (Incidentally, whether or not the subject ''wants'' a Wikipedia article has no bearing on their inclusion. If George W. Bush announced that he didn't want a Wikipedia article, that wouldn't be grounds to delete him. The same notability standards apply to everyone
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: The subject's desire to be in or out of WP is irrelevant, per precedents.  I see three respected journalists through one credible medium CNN; to me that provides the multiple; however, the multiple criterion is being disputed at  and consideration of one strong source is being acknowledged by many without clear consensus.  Clearly this is above trivial notice; whether it is  important or not is not required by WP
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)