This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
I'm having a difficult time imagining how this person meets our notability standards. She is not the subject of any substantial secondary sources, just minor press releases by neighborhood associations. The only reason she's in the news is because the Queen was recorded making remarks to her. --Laser brain(talk) 16:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is why she's in the news, and what alerted me to her, but not why she is notable, though that coverage certainly helps her pass the GNG test in my view. You will note that the article doesn't even mention the Queen or her comments to D'Orsi. She's notable because she is a very senior officer in the Met with significant responsibilities. I don't agree with your evaluation of the sources, they are not all minor at all. There were a lot more but I didn't feel the article needed them at this stage. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, well I'll chalk our difference in opinion up to my unfamiliarity with that level of law enforcement in the UK. I'd rather err on the side of inclusion and defer to your judgement. Thanks for the explanation. --Laser brain(talk) 22:16, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just seen a long piece in today's Times that discusses her handling of the Chinese visit. I will add it shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
