Deletion of Rabia Salihu Sa'id

Comment: I agree she may only be "an average academic" based on her publications, but she obviously meets  and  based on sources (BBC, NPR, Nature, Elsevier). Also, the article has been substantially improved since it the AFD nomination, making the case for keeping it even stronger
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:PEOPLE)

Comment: I'm pretty sure she does not pass  (the Elsevier thing is an early-career award, not enough for that criterion of ). But getting both the Elsevier award and the BBC 100 listing gives enough in-depth and reliable coverage of her for . As for the publications in bad journals: this seems to be pretty common for third-world academics, and if the case were based on  it would be a major problem, but I think the GNG case is independent of that. That said, any parts of the article based on material in bad journals (in particular the sentence cited to her own paper in IJETAE, for which see https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/10/25/journal-offers-authors-research-paper-royalty-scheme-for-getting-citations/ this post) should be trimmed from our article. It's not a reliable source both because of the journal quality issue and because it's by the subject rather than about her
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:PROF)