Deletion of Alison Garrigan (2nd)

Comment: The prior AFD didn't discuss sourcing specifically, so I don't know if the article then completely lacked sources, had the same ones, had different ones, etc...  The current article has as sources a Cleveland Plain Dealer article primarily about her, which puts her half way to meeting .  It has a trivial mention from the same newspaper, which doesn't help.  It has a passing mention from www.clevescene.com, which adds nothing.  It has an article from the Cleveland Jewish News that contains a sentence about her performance.  This also doesn't meet the primary subject portion of the  criteria.  I believe none of the inline links are to independent reliable sources; the best of them is most likely to an actress provided bio-blurb.  So I judge at this time that the article does not demonstrate notability to  standards
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BIO)

Comment: per nomination and the first discussion. I may also have interesting views but these alone do not make one |notable for an article. And faulty talk page reasoning doesn't bode well for this article either—you can have local professional theatres
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: I think she falls just short of  in that only one of the sources is actually about Garrigan herself (the interview). I don't espouse limiting notability to just national (after all most US states are larger than many countries), but it looks like she's hitting a career stride and may break through to broader coverage soon
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)