Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esther Richardson

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Courcelles 00:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Esther Richardson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable per WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, unreferenced per WP:BLP. Prod contested by creator. Top Jim (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. —Top Jim (talk) 20:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —Top Jim (talk) 20:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Searched Ghits and Gnews using '"Esther Richardson" theatre'. She is mentioned in numerous reviews in her various roles as actor, director and dramaturg. Whilst I would count an individual mention in a review as trivial, I think there's enough combined to clear the notability bar. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- This seems to be a sort of CV: she should put that on her own website, rather than using WP as a surrogate. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with this article format myself. It's quite normal for actor pages to list all their appearances. There is a case for limiting it to notable appearances (I'm open to arguments either way), but it's a long way from what I'd consider a surrogate CV. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:31, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.