Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denise Eisenberg Rich


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. John254 00:54, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Denise Eisenberg Rich

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability is not in inherited. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:46, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - she donated $1.1 million to the Democrats, in total, before Bill Clinton pardoned her husband. She subsequently donated $450,000 to his presidential library. She subsequently took the fifth and was granted immunity from prosecution. She was discussed by at least one House committee, and her name appears widely through the news media of the day. As a socialite, she partied at the White House, visited more than a dozen times during Clinton's administration, and set up a charity foundation. She is reported to be a 'mega-fundraiser' for charity. - Richard Cavell (talk) 14:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:BLP1E. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 21:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Obviously the article needs to be expanded and better referenced.  But her role in the Marc Rich pardon scandal is notable by any definition.  It's not a matter of "inherited" notability; it's her own actions in helping procure the pardon that are notable, not her ex-wifeness.  Beyond the pardon, she's a notable philanthropist, and a notable political fund-raiser, and Grammy-nominated songwriter.  More and beter refs yes.  Delete, no. David in DC (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Also, don't bite the newbies. David in DC (talk) 18:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep--She had an active role in the pardon, and her notability goes beyond WP:BLP1E. --Jmundo (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've sourced and edited the article. Close as keep, per WP:SNOW? David in DC (talk) 06:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Send a note to see if the non-keeps concur, otherwise it may be best to let it run. -- Banj e b oi   14:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. We might not have a rule that an extended interview in the New York Times infers notability but I would lean towards supporting it if such an idea popped up. Per BLP I would also suggest shifting the scandal bits down a bit in the still stubby article. -- Banj e b oi   14:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.