you are very much on the right track now a few things you'll want to adjust if you have more sources that are also strong especially ones that talk a little more about her overall career rather than just her books that would help flesh out the depiction of her when you have a list of items like works or links make sure to bullet each item using a just like i'm doing here and you needn't leave blank lines between list items when you bullet carefully skim through and remove anything that is even slightly subjective praise that's not directly sourced to a review commentator that is if the nyt says she's splendiferous you can mention that mention nyt said it and cite it but you absolutely cannot refer to her as renowned pathbreaking stellar imaginative etc in wikipedia's own voice this would likely pass just as it is but there's no harm and much benefit to continuing to beef it up a little also if her birth year is public record i e mentioned on some university site news article etc not by digging in city archives then please include that next to her name nice work i think you're really getting the hang of this now i like to avoid reviewing the same article multiple times when it's this close to passing so i'll wait until another reviewer puts fresh eyes on it