Talk:John B. Quinn

Deletions
Removed "Coming close on the heels of the loss to MGA, this was the second major loss in a row for Quinn and his firm, both in intellectual property cases." as there was no reference in point to support this.

Also removed: "Due to the quality of Quinn's lawyering" because, again, there was no reference to support the statement, and in any event, seemed to be contrary to the objective stance taken by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knoowii (talk • contribs) 13:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

COI
Considering some recent edits that seem to want to do nothing but beef up the article like an inflated resume, I wonder if there isn't a connection between editors and company/individual. I'm going to take this to the BLP noticeboard, and then we'll see. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Beyond My Ken, I agree with this tag removal--the one source is indeed a reliable source! Drmies (talk) 02:48, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It was hard to see as a naked link. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)