Deletion of Emily Hagins (2nd nomination)

Comment: WP:CREATIVE is not relevant if the subject passes the |general notability guidelines.  The article already contains references to establish notability.  And interest remains even after the initial coverage as evidenced in this http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=a9rhuOJid9mQ&refer=muse Bloomberg article from January 2009.  Aside from that, there is coverage in http://www.dreadcentral.com/interviews/hagins-emily-pathogen Dread Central, http://www.ajc.com/celebrations/content/shared/movies/stories/2008/09/zombie.html?cxntlid=inform_artr Atlanta Journal Constitution, http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A380881 Austin Chronicle, http://www.citynews.ca/news/features_34157.aspx CITY News
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: as the article is not about a film, but is about the filmmaker... who has the coverage per guidline to surpass both  and the basic inclusion criteria od .  is subordinant to them both. Kudos to
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BIO||WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: We do not judge notability directly ourselves.  We establish it because others have made note of the subject.  These articles are not passing mentions.  They are specifically about Emily Hagins.  The fact that she has done what she has done as such a young age has been '''noted''' by multiple '''reliable sources''' which are '''independent''' of the subject.  That is exactly what wikipedia notability is all about.  does not supplant the general notability guidelines
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)