Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Mitnick


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:26, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Craig Mitnick

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a promotional puff article of non-notable lawyer. The sole potential basis for notability is the single line "Mitnick was contracted as an on-air legal analyst for Fox News Channel, Fox Radio Network, and CBS," and that's not sufficient. The quasi-recognitions are either specious ("Lawyers of Distinction", for example, is a marketing scheme that will name pretty much anyone -- or even a dog -- as a "lawyer of distinction" for $475) or simple bar association memberships.

I initially PRODded it; the PROD was reverted by an IP editor with the comment "This is a valid page and is there is an objection to it being deleted. The page is sourced properly and every fact can be verified". To make it very clear, I do not contend that the page is unsourced (although much of it is, that could be a matter for editing). My contention is that the subject is not notable. TJRC (talk) 23:20, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Add'l comment by nom: the creating editor seems to have been dormant for several years, but reviewing his edit history, this seems to be a case of at least a WP:COI, and likely WP:UPE. His edits were mostly confined to this article and the four five -times-deleted article Nixle, a company started by Mitnick (and which seems to be equally non-notable). One of his edit summaries ("I have been asked by Craig Mitnick to edit...") makes it clear that he was editing at the behest of the subject of the article. TJRC (talk) 23:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as vanispam. Drmies (talk) 00:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable lawyer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * i’ve researched the sourcing and my tension is drawn to the company Mitnick Founded which is used by Homeland security. He is a notable lawyer and nationally recognized so there is an objection to the deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:3:805::94 (talk) 03:41, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable lawyer. WP:VANISPAM also holds true, The lawyer so far has done nothing that can hit the WP:NBIO. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  17:10, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * 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.