Deletion of Foreign trust

Comment: it is |not one of the major 7, or 8, or 12, types of trusts. I don't see how this can be rescued -- and I, too, am infamous for doing so, especially legal articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill (WP:MILL)

Comment: I have to go with the  principle on this one.  I am compelled by James500's argument that the topic should certainly pass notability guidelines easily enough with a little effort to securing new sources, but the current version as it stands has so many varied and significant issues with regard to our quality and admissibility standards that I can't see it getting from the current version to his vision of it while retaining any of the present content.   Particularly, it was strong issues with regard to ,  and with the formatting, style and tone of the prose.  An encyclopedic summary of the topic of the general legal principle involved could very well prove useful to our readers; this jumbled mess of an attempt to replicate a text detailing highly specific statutes in the idiolect of a law school lecture (complete with powerpoint-style presentation) most certainly is not.  I'm also troubled by the apparent COI activity of the single-purpose account
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:WWIN||WP:SUMMARYSTYLE)