Donald Trump as an endorser of the company has previously been endorsed What Sorry but this sentence doesn t parse Aside from that you seem to be leaning towards the notion that an endorser of something must be unpaid Check Wiktionary and you will see no implication that endorsement requires this It is a commonplace that if some celebrity endorses something beaucoups bucks was spent to achieve this Is the news that Catherine Zeta Jones endorses T Mobile something that can not be noted on Wikipedia because it is POV It is a fact that she did and they paid her well otherwise why the heck would she do it If I were to write in T Mobile s WP article however that T Mobile is such a great cell phone company that even the great actress Catherine Zeta Jones likes it that would be clearly POV and she didn t say that either she simply read the ad copy they gave her By the same token the news that Trump endorsed ACN is not POV but a fact Presumably they paid him something but maybe they didn t there is no publicly available information on this that I am aware of so saying he s a paid spokesman is a speculation and violates WP VERIFY I do happen to know that there is a contract of some kind covering ACN s use of his image and so on but that s not verifiable so its not in the article I tend to think that Trump doesn t need celebrity endorsement contracts to support his lifestyle but whatever As far as WP VERIFY is concerned the reference at the end of the paragraph attempted to cover the whole paragraph Do I need to add the reference to every sentence or assertion in the paragraph There is such a thing as over referencing things too No I think the paragraph should stay Sorry a typo This was a topic of discussion see the talk page archive Calling him an endorser without revealing that his is paid can be misinterpreted Being paid is akin to being a paid spokesman There is a completely different implication if one is paid to be on a commercial versus giving an endorsement without pay