Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Practising Law Institute


 * 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   Keep. The incoming links are indicative of editor collaboration and are the result of this article being listed in a maintenance category. Potential COI by an author of an article alone is not cause for deletion, as long as the article is neutral. Since COI can influence ones editing, it is discouraged, but not disallowed to edit such articles.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 06:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Practising Law Institute

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Advert. A look at the incoming links show over 85% from user pages, most interesting. Primary author appears to have a direct connection with this institution, a clear conflict of interest. B.Wind (talk) 03:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:17, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:17, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The linking from user talk pages is legitimate - not spam-related as you suggest. Rather, the article was recently listed on opentask as an article needing to be wikified - this template is on a number of User: and User talk: pages and Special:Whatlinkshere simply hasn't updated the listings now that the article is no longer in the template.  --Philosopher Let us reason together. 08:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, a relatively minor trade organization with no showing of general notability. The fact that continuing legal education is an obnoxious boondoggle had no influence on my opinion.  Really. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've taken PLI courses but I have no connection with the organization.  Many lawyers in New York are acquainted with PLI and might want to know more about it. JamesMLane t c 22:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  00:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep: Call me google addict, but a news search for "Practising Law Institute" highlights notability meting WP:org. --Jmundo (talk) 04:19, 28 December 2008 (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.