Deletion of Patricia Cloherty

Comment: this is a |marginally notable person.  I can't recall what |we have done in such cases.  Would you care to job my memory
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BARE||WP:OUTCOMES)

Comment: after citing  I decided to try and do exactly that. Have cleaned up all the references, some of the commentary not strictly supported by references and some of the other sections that needed work. Am now seeing more than enough "significant coverage" to justify keeping the article. Have also brought some sections back to more  language to (hopefully) address some of the concerns the subject had about the article (which, looking at it, were entirely justified). None of the coverage cited is in any way negative (in either general tone or specific assertion) so suggestions in the intro that gave  weight to marginal commentary should not have been there - in essence, one paragraph was picked out from a pages-and-pages-long feature article, responsibility for that "issue" was arbitrarily attributed to the subject (without verification) and then given undue weight via inclusion in the intro. Really inappropriate. I have now changed my "vote" above to ''Keep'' and have struck some of my commentary now which is probably no longer relevant
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM||WP:NPOV||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: Although the original article had numerous problems, the article has been |cleaned up significantly. The secondary sources demonstrate that the subject is notable and meets Wikipedia's |notability guideline for biographies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Cleanup (WP:CLEANUP||WP:BIO)

Comment: per , SOFIXIT, and GNG.  She is cited by numerous |reliable sources, such as ''Forbes'', so I would err on keeping the article now, that she is more than marginally notable.  Great job, Stalwart111
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY||WP:RS)