Should there be a lower threshold for notability in cases of
disambiguation? A while ago I ran into an issue on the article for
Susan Blanchard. Here's the version I found:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Susan_Blanchard_%28actress%29&…
As I worked on disambiguating, I found there were three American
actresses who could potentially be confused, so I split the two
mentioned above and made a disambig page:
-Susan Blanchard (actress): Notable for work on All My Children
-Susan Blanchard (socialite): Described as an actress in the press (no
credits listed) but better known for having married several famous
actors
-Susan Blanchard Ryan: Notable for the film Open Water
Susan Blanchard (socialite) was immediately nominated for speedy
deletion, under the argument that name confusion does not seem to be a
valid reason to create an article on someone who otherwise would not
merit one.
I understand the argument about Susan Blanchard (socialite) being
non-notable. However, more than half of the original article was about
her. That information didn't seem to belong on a disambiguation page,
but I didn't want to have it appear only on related pages (such as
articles on her notable husbands). Without a linked Susan Blanchard
article on the related pages, it seems the name confusion might
persist. I have run into the same problem where both people were
clearly notable, but this case seemed less clear.
I tend to be broadly inclusionist, so I would argue for separate
articles, even if one subject is far less notable, to help reduce
confusion. I can see where some would make a case for just a mention
on the disambiguation page, though. Thoughts?
Jokestress