Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diane Strickland

:{{la|Diane Strickland}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Diane_Strickland Stats])

:({{Find sources|Diane Strickland}})

This article is about a retired judge who served on the Review Panel of the Virginia Tech Massacre, and is listed as being a member of that panel in the Virginia Tech massacre article. This is textbook WP:BLP1E. "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." There was no news coverage of her participation on the panel, and there are no articles about her with regard to anything else that I can find. —D'Ranged 1 ^talk 10:16, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:50, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:50, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

---

:: I did find one additional article, apparently her daughter and her daughter's boyfriend were shot in the head and the car they were in was set on fire.[http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/02/26/morgan-state-grad-student-found-shot-in-head-in-burning-car/] I'm still not in favor of retaining the article; this just makes it two events instead of one. While she may be notable in her community as a retired judge, she still doesn't seem notable enough for inclusion here, although it is sadly ironic that her own daughter was a victim of gun violence after her mother served on the review panel, but Wikipedia is not about irony, either. To make matters more fun, the editor who created this article has been blocked from editing since September 11, 2007, for being a sock puppet. The article is currently three sentences long; perhaps I should have just used WP:PROD. —D'Ranged 1 ^talk 08:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Delete - I agree with nominator. Not really much general notability, short passing mentions aren't enough. Also I would note that all sources in article are dead links--Staberinde (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2014 (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.