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.
As per
WP:PROD by
User:K.e.coffman, this is a spammy advertorial article on a self-promoting lawyer. Lots of vanity and incidental coverage, but no real in-depth independent coverage. Just another case of using Wikipedia for
promotion.
Robert McClenon (
talk) 07:15, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete, confirming my PROD: An advertorially toned page on an unremarkable attorney. Significant RS coverage not found. What comes up is passing mentions or PR driven. Awards listed are not significant, and notability is not inherited from clients.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 04:50, 19 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. advertising. G11 is appropriate. I suppose coverage of the cases could be found, but it's irrelevant--we could probablty on that basis include every trial attorney. The area o the business he is in depends on publicity, but he can get it without us. DGG (
talk ) 06:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)reply
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.