Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawyers of Distinction

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. Enigma^msg 17:12, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lawyers of Distinction[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The references are all press-release style content promoting individual lawyers, and are trivial mentions of the organization. A more detailed description can be found in their own marketing; other coverage is extremely skeptical of the organization's credibility: [1] [2] (I doubt those sources would let the group meet GNG even as a scam, and they're not reliable enough to call it a scam in Wikipedia's voice). power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:43, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, although it did receive some opinion coverage for nominating a dog.[3] Bakazaka (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, though it was only created 2 days ago. My searching various repositories does not turn up significant coverage. This appears to be a sort of top-lawyers mutual recognition network, and it might be significant but not based on verifiable sources found to date. Another issue with this is the term "lawyers of distinction"; this phrase has been used for more than a century to highlight lawyers thought to be of great repute, confounding search for the proper noun. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- this is not a notable guide. Notability for a guide is not inherited from its entries. This is barely more than spam. The directory itself is a pay-for-play deal. Bearian (talk) 19:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.