Deletion of Mimi Macpherson

Comment: I agree that notability isn't demonstrated here. However, the level of sourcing ''is'' in line with that for many, many biographies of other marginally famous people which have survived AfDs. As such, I think that it may be time to revise the BLP guidelines to require some demonstration of intrinsic notability as well as sources - this would be in line with  which considers the significance of an academic's work as well as whether they have personally received media coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Clearly fails BLP1E, just because she's related to someone famous doesn't mean she's famous. I also agree with Jimbo, right to privacy here is most important. And for the record Lester, using  at AFD is not a great argument, or a way to support one! I've found that out the hard way :) '''BarkingFish
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: per Jimbo. Public awareness of her begins and continues in most part because of her sister. We shouldn't confuse notoriety with notability. Notability depends on reliable sources notoriety doesn't. Per otability multiple, compliant sources are generally expected. Nor should we make a decision based on past mistakes on Wikipedia, if mistakes they are, in regards to the comment above on tabloids. More mistakes even more cleanup
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)