Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R. Scott Oswald (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 22:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

R. Scott Oswald
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Procedural nomination. This has been flagged for about four years now as advertorialized and likely paid editing, but has not been dealt with to any significant degree until just a couple of weeks ago, when somebody basically blanked almost the entire article so that it literally just said he exists, the end. I've reverted it accordingly, because that's not an appropriate response to problems with a Wikipedia article -- but if responding to content problems in a Wikipedia article requires you to strip it so bare that it isn't even making a basic notability claim anymore, then the real question is whether the page should actually be here at all. That said, I'm not an expert in assessing the notability of American lawyers: it may be that the article's actually fine and the content tags should just be removed, or it may be that there are content problems here and they're repairable, or it may be that the page should actually be deleted -- but no matter what, if it's been tagged for four full years without resolution, then it needs AFD to weigh in. (Also note that an earlier AFD discussion was closed "no consensus".) Bearcat (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Apart from being promotional, the creator was blocked as one of many socks of a UPE - the lawyer may well be notable but this article needs TNT  JW 1961   Talk  22:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:53, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per reasoning above.--Bettydaisies (talk) 00:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete this is a clearly overly promotional article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTRESUME, WP:TNT, and my standards for lawyers. The format is a huge mess. It is claimed that he was President of the "Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association (MWELA)", but it's unclear how large or independent that group is. I can't find very much that is not off of unreliable sources. Bearian (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2021 (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.