Deletion of Tom Richmond (cinematographer)

Comment: as there is enough coverage to pass  such as Filmmaker and Cinematograher Style Book and American Cinematographer, imv
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per Nom: Unsourced |BLP and sources provided do not give enough information to substantiate notability for a stand alone article. If there has been a "project" (official or not) to include all things IMDb on Wikipedia then reviewing and deleting inappropriate subjects is just as important. I actually did not see this was nominated but made comments on the article talk page when I was not able to find anything to warrant a stand alone article. When notability is questioned being "pretty sure" there is coverage somewhere in the world (maybe on American Cinematographer?) is not a good rationale for "keep". We keep articles that comply with the broad community standards of reliable sourcing. If sourcing or content is contested, then per : {{tq|The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material}}. When there are no sources (so no inline citations), and IMDb in an "External link" inappropriately supporting the content and title with no other sources, notability is not evident. A  is usually performed and the criteria is a "minimum search". If that does not produce results then the criteria is satisfied so there is no need to |cast even nicely worded aspersions
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:CHALLENGE||WP:BEFORE||WP:ASPERSIONS)