Deletion of Tim Kevan

Comment: no evidence that he meets the  criteria. The most usual ways for lawyers to become notable are "making a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field" and/or "achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events". Neither of these appear to be the case here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: per nom and . Being a rent-a-quote doesn't make someone notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: No evidence presented of passing , and I can find none (e.g. in Lexis-Nexis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: even after cleanup. I'll admit he skirts the edge of  enough that I had to think about it, but in the end I still don't think he's quite reached notability yet. Maybe if one of his books had been more popular or if he'd gotten some mainstream media coverage somewhere. He does seem like the sort of person who will qualify for an article in the future, but not quite yet. Nice hair though
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)