Talk:Margaret Durrell

message: :Image:Margotdurrell.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Margotdurrell.jpg

message: :Image:Margotdurrell.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 00:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Margotdurrell.jpg

message: In light of an AFD vote on Leslie Durrell - the article was turned into a redirect to Durrell Family because of his extreme non-notability - I thought I'd raise the same question here: Does Margo deserve an article? I'd say no; siblings of notable people are not notable, and her posthumous autobiography is a slim reed on which to hang this article. Still, the question isn't quite the slam-dunk that Leslie was. Any thoughts? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, nobody has responded to this - which I'll take as votes that the current situation is fine with them. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 11:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi, David. Good point. This is definitely an article we should think of merging into Durrell family somewhere down the future. While Leslie's article is surely grounds for AfD, Margo's article's claim to notability hinges on three things:
* Appearance in the trilogy, and aaccompanying adaptations (also true for Leslie)
* Helping GD during initial years of setting up zoo (not really a bullet point)
* The autobiography
I think a good index to whether merge or not would be to see if she had obit s in papers outside the Jersey Post. But how would one go about finding that ? ray (talk) 14:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with the points of notability raised by Pradiptaray above. Though Margo is not extremely notable, she is certainly more significant than Leslie. What I think is this: Keep the article for now, work on it, clean it up, then eventually consider merging it with the Durrell Family page. Perhaps we could expand that page so that it contained a larger history of the family (i.e., more on Lawrence Samuel, etc.). Yes, I don't think it is terribly important for Margaret to have an article, but I don't think there's any reason to go about deleting it anytime soon. Let's see how things work out. - I.M.S. (talk) 03:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this deserve to be an article?