Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Larson (3rd nomination)
I was going to close this; however, as I read the article and the sources, checked the http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/Sarah_Larson page view stats, read the comments, did a bit of checking and found a more recent book source which discussed her, I was swayed toward keep. I may not be interested in this person, but clearly a lot of people are. We personally, either as individuals or as small cliques of Wikipedia editors, do not determine notability - we have agreed to let reliable sources do that, and the sources indicate some notability for this person under our guidelines. However, the delete !votes significantly outweighed the keeps, and while some were not on-policy ("per nom" or variations of ), others were citing  or making good points. While the keep comments were also making good points and citing GNG, I wasn't sure there was enough consensus for a keep. I didn't want to close this as a delete, as I feel that would be inappropriate. Nor did I want to close either as no consensus or keep, as I felt I might be introducing a upervote. So I am not closing, but adding my opinion, and hoping to assist another closer to mark this as No consensus or even keep
— User:SilkTork, 16:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:ONEEVENT||WP:S (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)