Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maud Mitchell
per nom. The main potential claims to notability seem to be  (based on subject's membership of IRA and C na mB),  (based on subject's book) or  (based on general coverage of the subject). In terms of MILPERSON there is no evidence that the subject held a rank or received any award to distinguish them from the tens of thousands of other people who participated in the War of Independence. In terms of NAUTHOR, a single family-memoir publication does not meet the expectations of the guideline. And, in terms of GNG, there just doesn't seem to be enough coverage to establish notability (a single passing mention in a real-estate advertorial piece falls short of SIGCOV by some distance). That we are relying on a user-generated genealogical website to support the content would seem to reinforce the lack of significant coverage to support the content. Mine is a firm "delete" recommendation. (The author might also do well to heed the notes from several editors about not using Wikipedia as a free web-host for content better suited to a family history blog or to ancestry.com. 
— User:Guliolopez, 11:58, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:MILPERSON||WP:AUTHOR||WP:GNG||WP:NOTMEMORIAL (Wikipedia:Notability)