Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legal Advisor (Poland)


 * 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 no consensus. Although the unrebutted analysis by people who are familiar with this aspect of Polish legal organization suggests that this deletion request results from a misunderstanding. Any further cleanup that is required can be done without deletion.  Sandstein  13:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Legal Advisor (Poland)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Seems to be a WP:FORK of Lawyers in Poland. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:21, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. The nomintor's rationale is poor, in fact they present no arguments, just an opinion. The article is well referenced. They failed to note that pl wiki separates the concept of a legal advisor (pl:Doradca prawny) and Lawyers in Poland. The latter doesn't have a Polish interwiki, but given pl:prawnik = Jurist, while pl:adwokat = Adwokat, the "lawyers in Poland" is covered by the pl:Adwokat section, which actually forms most of that article (and should be split, I'll tackle this soon and fix the interwikis). Anyway, since the nom didn't question notability or such, but just suggested this is a fork, given the existence of separate Polish articles and their content, I'd say the terms are related but not forks. If anyone disagrees, they need to provide a deeper analysis of this. I'll end by WP:TROUTing the nom for this low quality nomination based on, well, pretty much nothing substantial. PS. Legal systems are complex; there are sill Polish wikipedia articles about Polish legal systems, including professions and titles, that are not translated (ex. pl:radca prawny, pl:mecenas). Separately, the article discussed here may need to be moved to attorney-at-law (Poland) per the terminology recommendation by a relevant Polish professional body (pl:Krajowa Rada Radców Prawnych, which also doesn't have an English article yet). See pl:Doradca_prawny for some discussion on translations and relation to English terms, including attorney-at-law, legal advisor, solicitor, barrister, etc. On that note this entire nom makes about as much sense in the Polish law contexts and suggesting that we should merge articles about solicitors and barristers... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment, out of scope for an AfD debate, but the article gets off on a bad foot by stating "The status of legal advisors is not regulated by law", and in the very next sentence, "Only lawyers can be legal advisors", thereby leaving any non-Polish reader completely flummoxed about what a legal advisor actually is. Part of me thinks that it would make some sense to include legal advisors in the article on Lawyers in Poland, from which they are firmly absent. I have no objection to this article being kept (to avoid bloat in other articles), but would remind its editors that we are a general English-language encyclopaedia, not a Polish law school. The detailed discussion of the Constitutional Tribunal ruling in 2003 should probably be summarised in a single sentence. Elemimele (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Just a note that legal advisors are linked from that article. I admit this is confusing, and trust me, not just in English - I was quote puzzled when I realized in Polish, which is my native language, we have the separate concepts of "radca prawny" and "doradca prawny". Both appear to be notable, however. Wikipedia may be English-language, but we have a ton of articles on concepts, including legal, from other languages, so that part of your argument I think is not relevant. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 18:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Lawyers in Poland. Definitely a language problem (attorney, counselor, barrister, solicitor, advocate, and their Polish equivalents) involved in finding sources. Question about this being a topic fork?  I know very little about this subject in this jurisdiction.  Nie rozumiem języka polskiego.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 12:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

1) In Poland, we have advocates (adwokaci) and attorneys-at-law (radcowie prawni). Notice how law firms in Poland, for example, Polish units of Deloitte, name their lawyers without admission to the bar. Usually "associates", "in-house" (I'm not a fan of this distinction, because, in my opinion, it should be a professional attorney) or "legal advisors". 2) It is distinctive that we have a profession that is not regulated in the separate act of parliament, and I think it's worth representation on Wiki. This article does not create "alternative facts". Google "doradztwo prawne" or "biura doradztwa prawnego", it's a Polish phenomenon. 3) The National Bar Council of Attorneys-at-Law (See: the resolution of 22 September 2018) adopted the official translation of the legal profession of radca prawny as attorney-at-law. Link: https://www.oirpwarszawa.pl/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/uchwa%C5%82a-102_2018-KRRP.pdf Centyja (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Nuts to that! Legal advisors in Poland most definitely are regulated by law. The law is .  And advocates are regulated by a different law, .  English language sources like  (which gives these laws) call them "legal advisors" and "advocates", so let's not make up our own translations.  Britishizing/Americanizing this stuff leads to false equivalences. And they most definitely are required to maintain secrecy. That's actually what  is all about, and it even gives the exact places in the two respective Codes of Ethics that require this.  And unlike the anonymously authored and wrong article in BusinessInsider that is being used, that book chapter is written by two identified members of the professional ethics committee. Please improve this rubbish and wrong explanation, or just write it in the right place.   explains the differences between legal advisors and advocates, in English for non-Polish readers.  It also treats the twain together, pretty much inextricably and at length, and I observe that Lawyers in Poland does so too, but cites almost nothing except a couple of WWW sites, when it could be citing an expert-written book on the subject from a couple of EU/international law professors. And where the Polish Wikipedia is using an anonymous inexpert article from BusinessInsider instead of actual expert sources written by identifiable people with credentials in the field, it is wrong, too. Uncle G (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: Hi, short explanation from my side.
 * Comment: Hi, short explanation from my side.
 * Comment: Hi, short explanation from my side.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.