Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Log/2015 May 8

Stats
The article was created at 5KB, and grew to about 9KB when sources were added. The AFD was 23 KB, and the DRV (still going) is at 54 KB. That is, the DRV is still open, but is now ten times the article as written. AFD (Bytes added):
 * 1) Bencherlite		6,047 (nominator)
 * 2) Philafrenzy		5,653
 * 3) SandyGeorgia	4,751
 * 4) James500		2,227
 * 5) Black Kite      	1,462
 * 6) Andrew Davidson 1,266

DRV (Bytes added):
 * 1) James500		21,307
 * 2) Philafrenzy		6,913
 * 3) DGG	        	4,085
 * 4) SandyGeorgia	3,434
 * 5) Dirtlawyer1		2,219
 * 6) Tarc	        	1,841
 * 7) Stalwart111	       1,677
 * 8) Black Kite     	1,620

So, I am not understanding the reasoning for arguing so strongly for this particular BLP. If James500 and Philafrenzy feel so strongly about notability of attorneys (who will always get passing mention in newspapers when cases are covered), would it not be more productive for them to argue for or develop a guideline for the legal profession, similar to WP:PROF for academics? What makes this particular attorney worth all this effort? Considering the whole matter came to my attention casually when it was linked to an article I wrote, I find the effort expended here hard to understand and a curious situation. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 12:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea, since the amount of paid editing seems to be increasing without a corresponding rise in declared COIs. Although Philafrenzy denied a COI, their behavior passes my duck test for a paid editor. I popped the question vaguely because compensation can be other than monetary. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please withdraw this insulting comment Miniapolis. I am not paid in money or any other way to create articles and never have been. There's nothing wrong with fighting your corner it doesn't mean anything. I resent this unfounded slur on my integrity. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:56, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No "slur" intended, but when I'm faced with a conflict between words and deeds I go by deeds. I can't think of another reason for fighting this so hard.  Mini  apolis  23:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * (ec) Well, all you can do is ask. (I'm reminded that FergusM1970 denied until busted!)   It certainly is troubling when editors are speedily creating articles without establishing notability, and just setting up a lot of work for *other* editors-- I certainly am not paid to clean up after other editors!   I believe we should expect that long-established editors should not put up articles that require extensive cleanup by others ... we expect and tolerate that from newbies, but I don't know why Philafrenzy is in such a hurry to add what turns out to be poor content.  Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)