Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandra Seacat
per meeting otability (people).  The |cummulative coverage deals with her directly and in enough detail so an encyclopedic article can be maintained.http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Sandra+Seacat%22http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Sandra+Seacat%22&tbm=nws&tbs=ar:1http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Sandra+Seacat%22  The result of |continued editing being that we have a now-decently-sourced BLP about an acting coach and instructor who was herself a theater, film, and television actress, before she turned to instructing others.  Kudos to User:AuthorAuthor and User:DavidESpeed for their continued work in giving it the nominator-suggested "complete overhaul" since this article was first nominated.  Sharing one's expertise and knowledge through teaching might indeed be reasonably expected to gain accolades from former students, and being influential to the work of others can show notability without such praise being referred to as .  This article is a welcome addition to Wikipedia... alongside those of her acting instructor peers Lee Strasberg, Constantin Stanislavski, Stella Adler, Robert Lewis, and Sanford Meisner.  Writing of her work as an actor and filmmaker is expected in a properly comprehensive BLP. ''Significant coverage'' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.  Praise from ones peers may be short but does not then become "trivial" simply because it is short. I do like that ''The New York Times'' called her "respected" and that ''CNN'' referred to her as "legendary
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 06:31, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:HANDLE||WP:INHERITED (Wikipedia:Notability)