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