Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricia Driscoll (executive)


 * 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 Delete. I call this a consensus to delete, but even if there's no consensus, WP:BLP default to delete, particularly given that one of the two editors advocating keeping the article proposes doing so so that it can be a convenient platform for a hatchet job. There appear to have been good faith efforts made by both User:DGG and User:SwisterTwister to source the article, and they found nothing. Steve Smith (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Patricia Driscoll (executive)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable author: her only actual book was self-published by her foundation when she was president of it. Foundation executive of slightly notable organization, does not prove notability. Most of the 3rd party references deal with an alleged crime that has not been proven, and therefore should not be included according to our bLP policy.  DGG ( talk ) 21:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable individual.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * See WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE. North America1000 08:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as I have unsurprisingly found nothing better but, also, there's nothing at all minimally notably acceptable with the listed information and sources not at all convincing. With that, this all suggests overall there's nothing to salvage at all. SwisterTwister   talk  22:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete This person was a significant public person on a national level as the former President of Armed Forces Foundation a 501(c)3 non-profit charity and the former girlfriend of a NASCAR Sprint Cup driver and former Champion of the sport. She later broke up with him and accused him of domestic violence.  It was national news.  A trial was held to determine if a restraining order was necessary.  It caused him harm when he was suspended from racing in NASCAR until the matter was settled.  It was when the district attorney said there was no evidence to suggest domestic violence.  She later resigned from the charity she worked for under the cloud of accusations that money was misappropriated from the charity.  The FBI and the IRS is investigating these charges.  Yes this person is significant.  She wanted to be famous and now she has become infamous for other reasons.  Currently there is no reason to delete this posting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaAFF41 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:GNG. and good sourcing. the users !voting delete seems to vote for only the author claim but forgets that she is a noted businesswoman.BabbaQ (talk) 13:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment "former girlfriend of a NASCAR Sprint Cup driver and former Champion of the sport." is a pretty absurd reason for keeping. It's a violation of nOT INHERITED and NOT TABLOID. To keep the article because she filed domestic violence charge which were dismissed, and "She later resigned from the charity she worked for under the cloud of accusations that money was misappropriated from the charity. The FBI and the IRS is investigating these charges" is a gross and outright violation of WP:BLP.   DGG ( talk ) 02:12, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment and Keep" This person is significant still. A person who plays a part or a role as a business woman in charge of a charity from which she is suspected as a thief from that Charity in historic and newsworthy.  She may not be as famous as Steven Nardizzi and Al Giordano of the Wounded Warrior Project, but like them she is constantly playing the victim in the world of non-profit charity misappropriation. In her case she still plays the part of a domestic violence victim despite the charges being dropped (which she never mentions).  Getting a restraining order for Domestic Violence is not the same as being charged and being convicted.  But whenever she has the chance she plays the victim to the detriment of the other person involved.  She still is in the public eye and playing the victim is her method to obtain sympathy and keep her name relevant. She still manages to convince others she is not what she is and having this page deleted would be to her benefit despite her being the one who started her own wiki page many years ago.  She still has others doing her dirty work and convinces other she is not what she is. https://fundly.com/m2/patricia-driscoll-was-there-for-us-now-she-needs-our-help  Her story still is alive and ongoing.  Do not delete.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaAFF41 (talk • contribs) 07:19, 25 June 2016 (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.