Talk:John B. Quinn

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Deletions

Removed "Coming close on the heels of the loss to MGA, this was the second major loss in a row for Quinn and his firm, both in intellectual property cases." as there was no reference in point to support this.

Also removed: "Due to the quality of Quinn's lawyering" because, again, there was no reference to support the statement, and in any event, seemed to be contrary to the objective stance taken by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knoowii (talk • contribs) 13:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Considering some recent edits that seem to want to do nothing but beef up the article like an inflated resume, I wonder if there isn't a connection between editors and company/individual. I'm going to take this to the BLP noticeboard, and then we'll see. Drmies (talk) 02:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond My Ken, I agree with this tag removal--the one source is indeed a reliable source! Drmies (talk) 02:48, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. It was hard to see as a naked link. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]