Deletion of Adam Banner

Comment: The problem here is not the quantity of sources, but the quality. What I was able to find - and what is cited previously in this discussion - are not focused on him. They mention him along with a case he is defending or he is quoted as part of a story on something related to law. The coverage needs to be more focused on him in order to establish notability. Because there are merely mentions and quotes he would fail  in my opinion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Per , , and others, as a |promotional Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|BLP about a local lawyer that lacks references, among the many supplied, advancing |notability. Wikipedia:Bombardment|Refbombing local |trivial court cases as an attorney, that I could not even find https://www.superlawyers.com/about/digital_magazine.html nationally listed in the http://digital.superlawyers.com/superlawyers/okslrs14?pg=16#pg16 top 50 of his field, and local commentaries and opinion pieces as an |author, does not establish notability. The ''many'' loaded language|loaded words  of "greatness" is |puffery, as well as |original research. GNG states ''"Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content."''. Some of the content can only be understood by someone privy to information not supplied in the references. The policy on Wikipedia:Verifiability|Verifiability states |''"Use sources that '''directly support the material''' presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:GNG||WP:PROMOTION||WP:TRIVIAL||WP:OR||WP:SOURCES||WP:notability||WP:author||WP:puffery)

Comment: Per  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:GNG)

Comment: Per  and . Promotional article for a lawyer lacking notable citations/references
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:GNG)