Deletion of Cathy Malchiodi

Comment: She passes #C1 and it's not so promotional that it can't be cleaned up
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Leaning keep.  Her books are highly cited, making  C1 plausible.   also looks likely.  I added one review to the article, here are two more https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jts.2490050122 https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/276620012.pdf.  Her edited volume has also been reviews https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08322473.2008.11432311?journalCode=ucat20.  I agree that the article needs cleanup
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:NAUTHOR)

Comment: She has a large number of GS citations for  C1, but looking through them, an unusually large number appear to be erroneous or repeated.  I searched in Scopus, and still believe in the NPROF case, but it's weaker than first appears.  However, the NPROF case is supported by .  She has a large number of books, and while the number of reviews is relatively small, I think it's a weak pass.  http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n88151383/ Worldcat helps support, showing many books held by hundreds or thousands of libraries.  Combining the two, I think it's a solid keep case.  The article is not in great shape, with puffery, a completely unsourced "Research and achievements" section, etc etc
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:NAUTHOR)