Deletion of Scott Cole & Associates

Comment: User:Scottedwardcole did not "edit war to get his own material into the article" but, in fact, was removing completely unsourced  material added by a  in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scott_Cole_%26_Associates&type=revision&diff=892307033&oldid=890476159 this series of edits, and then reverted back to by experienced Wikipedia editors who should know better. User:Scottedwardcole should not have been edit-warring, nor indeed editing the article at all, but their good faith edits and attempt to request article protection were aimed at dealing with the disruption caused by the  account in repeatedly adding unsourced material in a manner that I would consider |vandalism
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV||WP:SPA||WP:SPA||WP:VAND)

Comment: A COI editor having edited an article is not in itself reason to delete it. We seem to have at least two apparently reliable sources discussing the organization and/or its founder and their work. And that's just from merely clicking the Google link provided above (see ). ''http://www.sfweekly.com/culture/meet-the-lawyer-suing-equifax-and-apple/ Meet the Lawyer Suing Equifax and Apple'', from SF Weekly, is based in a reporter's interview with Cole but explicitly says "'''Cole is well-known among his peers for his work in the 1994 case'''" and also has '''detailed coverage''' of different aspects of his work '''over an extended historical period'''. Meanwhile ''https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/legal-news/california_labor_law/interview-california-labor-law-65-22438.html Attorney discusses the California Employment Lawsuit'' from LawyersAndSettlements.com, although again based on an interview carried out by their reporter, again has '''extensive analysis''' of the firm's work
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: per TJRC. Some of these cases might be notable, but the firm itself doesn't have sufficient sourcing to support an article. Also noting that I just cleaned up some |citation spamming from an https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/50.242.96.105 associated IP. Given the spamming we should go ahead and salt this now to save ourselves the grief later
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Spam (WP:CITESPAM)