Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scheiner Law Group

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. Secret ^account 17:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scheiner Law Group

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is nothing more than an advertisement/directory listing. There is no evidence of in-depth significant coverage of this firm in reliable independent sources. The references are simply various certifications and ratings and "find-a-lawyer" services which contain material supplied by the subject. I can find nothing better. That the senior partner is a "Texas Super Lawyer" according to the website Super Lawyers appears to be the firm's greatest claim to fame. The criteria for that is based on the site's evaluation of a lawyer as being in the top 5% in a particular US State. Texas has 95,000 active members of the State Bar, i.e. the senior partner of this firm is is one of 5000 lawyers. This is not sufficient to warrant an article about him, let alone his firm. Note that this article was originally deleted as unambiguous advertising and recreated. The only difference between the two versions was the removal of the advertorial section on their staff members [1]. Voceditenore (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not mentioned in any newspapers or books. External websites cannot be a reliable source. - Vatsan34 (talk) 17:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Of course websites can be reliable sources (snopes? fact checkers? etc. etc.), but they have to be secondary and independent and provide significant coverage as well. (The Super Lawyers website is a primary source for the fact that Scheiner is a Texas Super Lawyer.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete*: I couldn't find any significant coverage of the firm in independent secondary sources. However, I'm open to a possible redirect to Grant Scheiner as the guy is frequently quoted in prominent cases. This Hindu source is a good example because he's quoted extensively throughout the article, but there are many more (e.g. [2][3][4][5]). My inclination is that these aren't "significant coverage" about Mr. Scheiner, and therefore he doesn't meet WP:BIO, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I just now restored the entire article history, upon request. Bearian (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:06, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and redirect as needed. Bearian (talk) 19:03, 11 October 2014 (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.