Deletion of Don Martin (public affairs)

Comment: Nineteen Nightmares - I would caution you to be very careful before accusing an editor or editors of sockpuppetry.  I noted that you have recently starting editing so I would, |assuming good faith, believe that you have not taken to the time to read the Talk:Don Martin (public affairs).  If you had done so, you would have seen that the main proponent of the article (and the one that probably has a ) was on one side of an argument on the lawsuit section and both Giftiger & I were on the other side, along with several other editors.  I would strongly recommend that you read the talk page before making any other accusations of ''fishy'' aromas.  As to notability, please check the standards of  - there are 28 references listed and several that had been removed in the content dispute reselution process.  There is plenty more that hasn't been added to the article to show notability, including a series of articles on Martin's representation during the discussion of a possible sale of Austin's city owned utility company and other controversies.  Regards
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF||WP:COI||WP:GNG)