Talk:Meritas (law)

Writer has reviewed style guidelines to improve encyclopedic quality of entry. Linzc 02 (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Greetings. This article appears to be wikispam, i.e., an advertisement masquerading as an article. Articles considered advertisements include those that are solicitations for a business, product or service, or are public relations pieces designed to promote a company or individual. Wikispam articles are usually noted for sales-oriented language and external links to a commercial website. Blatant examples of advertising masquerading as articles can be speedily deleted.


 * When an article on an otherwise encyclopedic topic has the tone of an advertisement, the article can often be salvaged by rewriting it in a neutral point of view and adding context, e.g., historical relevance or community recognition. Please provide sources to establish the subject's notability. Of course, the need for sources goes beyond notability. Information added to an article must be verifiable, and facts included must be attributed to a reliable source. Please also see Wikipedia's guideline concerning conflicts of interest. Thanks. --Evb-wiki (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This edit, in my mind, shows a good faith effort to bring the article into compliance. It still has a way to go, but it's progressed enough that I'm going to remove the tag I placed. I will be keeping an eye on the article and hope to see further refinements, especially integrating the news reports into the article itself. Pairadox (talk) 16:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Article tags—November 2009

 * Tag history|
 * 24 January 2008: User:Pairadox a  tag to this article.
 * 15 February 2009: User:Addbot an  tag to this article.
 * 12 November 2009: User:Colonel Warden, with an edit summary of "Remove tags"—although he did not add any incoming wikilinks, nor did he add any proof of notability.
 * 14 November 2009: I along with  and . I also  on his talk page asking him to not remove tags unless he either fixed the problems or got consensus here that they should go.
 * 15 November 2009: User:Colonel Warden again, this time with an edit summary of "re Commercial Law Affiliates &c."


 * I've now re-added the four tags, with these rationales|
 * : To date, no WP:RS have been found with in-depth coverage of Meritas. Mentions in local business newsletters and brief coverage as one of several examples in an umbrella article don't count towards notability.
 * : According on WP:Orphan, this article currently has one incoming link—which on 15 November. Per those criteria, this article still qualifies as an orphan.
 * : User:Pairadox initially added a to User:Linzc 02's talk page  back in January 2008. I agree with that tag, and suspect that both User:Linzc 02 (the article creator) and User:Krystlemeath have some personal interest in this organization.
 * : Just like the tag, there's no solid sourcing here. Improved references could take care of both these tags.


 * In summary|
 * Please don't remove these tags without either fixing the described issues, or without a consensus here to remove them. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 06:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I consider that the topic has adequate notability and have added another source today. The COI matter seems stale now as the article has been inspected and updated by several editors now and I, for one, do not have any COI that I am aware of.  If a record of the article's history seems appropriate then there an appropiate template for use on the talk page, IIRC.  Only the orphan point seems live but that's not an issue requiring any edit to this article.  I may create a more general article about organisations of this sort as the most recent source indicates that there are quite a few of them which it discusses in an even more general context of the globalisation of law services.  Colonel Warden (talk) 12:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Meritas (law). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714082357/http://www.mggg.com/publications/2007/p2007_02_07_cdnlawyer1.pdf to http://www.mggg.com/publications/2007/p2007_02_07_cdnlawyer1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:12, 8 June 2017 (UTC)