Deletion of William T. Reid IV

Comment: u|Bbarmadillo}}, please try to not to cast aspersions on other editors' qualifications. Funnily enough, I (the editor who removed the 'notable cases') do happen to have a law degree, but that is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. The cases were not notable, and listing them does not establish the notability of the lawyer, particularly when they were basically primary sources with passing mentions. Also, note that there is no ''requirement'' at  for {{u|DGG}} to notify you, even though it can be seen as courteous. You have generally been one of the better paid editors around here, but the amount of time your contributions are taking up from volunteers here in order to promote your clients seems to be starting to wear thin for a number of us
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:AFD)

Comment: I took a pretty hard look at many of the citations - in part because the article is suspiciously overcited.  The National Law Journal and Law360 coverage falls squarely within : You can't scratch your nose in corporate legal circles without attracting a short article in either or both of these journals.  The Highland Capital matters are not about Mr. Reid, who attracts only a brief mention as the plaintiffs' litigator, but about their case against Credit Suisse.  Similarly for the Fastow article. The Weltwoche article is the only one that comes close to actually discussing Reid himself (and Weltwoche is a credible Swiss magazine) but the article is still 90% about UBS and the reference to Reid is only in the context of the litigation. Overall, Mr. Reid simply hasn't attracted any attention beyond the routine for a capable corporate litigator
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE)