Deletion of Kate Marie Byrnes

Comment: While it is possible that an ambassador can pass , they are not inherently notable under  (also see ). In this case, the current coverage of the subject includes a quick blurb in the Hill and a one line mention in Politico. The Kyiv Post article is more interesting, but that does not make this subject more notable than most ambassadors
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NPOL||WP:POLOUTCOMES)

Comment: Meets the criteria at 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: WP:NPOL is not relevant as she is not an elected politician, she is an ambassador (a position for a public servant). Wikipedia:Notability (people)/ applies, informed by  (which is only an essay). The article does not demonstrate any particular notability for this individual
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:DIPLOMAT)

Comment: Ambassadors are not automatically notable but this one has received significant coverage in Ukranian sources and passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: the subject passes  and .  Article, sources, citations have been significantly improved.  Per , this is not the article it was when nominated for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:GNG||WP:HEY)

Comment: being an ambassador is not an automatic pass of  however the subject passes  so it is a keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do better. It is actually ''not'' "customary" for us to keep inadequately sourced articles about ambassadors just because their existence is technically verifiable — there are certainly ambassadors in the world who have enough |reliable source coverage to clear  and/or held NPOL-passing political roles at other times in their careers, and we certainly do keep those, but we do not deem ambassadorship to be an "inherently" notable role that always guarantees every ambassador an article without regard to their sourceability: for ambassadors, it's always GNG or bust. But the sources here aren't getting her over GNG: there's a |primary source that isn't support for notability at all, two very short blurbs about her that aren't substantive enough to count as notability clinchers if they're the best you can do, and one glancing namecheck of her existence in an article whose core subject is Mike Pompeo. That's not good enough
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES)

Comment: I beg to differ; I'm not sure how our criterion () regarding "politicians ... who have held international, national, or sub-national ... office" excludes ambassadors, who, by definition, hold positions of international regard. I can tell you that ''Who's Who (UK)|Who's Who'', for instance, most certainly cares about civil servants, which include members of the diplomatic service. If I may, I would have also preferred a more personalized message informing me of this AfD.  &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)