Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Lynch (2nd nomination)
Subject clearly passes&nbsp;the |general notability guideline, which reads {{tq|If a topic has received&nbsp;significant coverage&nbsp;in&nbsp;reliable sources&nbsp;that are&nbsp;independent&nbsp;of the subject, it is&nbsp;presumed&nbsp;to be suitable for a stand-alone article or&nbsp;list}}, and since it contains secondary sourcing it fulfills the requirement {{tq|of&nbsp;at least one&nbsp;secondary source}} within it.&nbsp;Both academic texts ({{Tq|When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources}}) and contemporary newspapers({{tq|"News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact}} are reliable sources, and provide the sole sourcing of the article:&nbsp;{{tq|Sources of evidence include recognized peer-reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally}}. {{pb}}It's worth remembering that notability on Wikipedia does not require a person to have been notable in their lifetime, or even to have done anything notable. {{Pb}} Incidentally, the perceived quality of the article is irrelevant:&nbsp;{{tq|if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability}}. Over all, the nomination seems to be confusing notability with individual significance, but of course,&nbsp;{{tq|notability does not&nbsp;necessarily&nbsp;depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity}}.{{pb}} The nomination itself is flawed: "perhaps a self-published book" is nullified by the "perhaps
— User:Serial, 17:15, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)