Deletion of Ken McKenna (attorney)

Comment: to Better By You, Better Than Me '''as required by the attribution policy'''. As content from this article has been merged there, this article ''must'' be retained as a redirect, as otherwise the attribution chain is broken and the text in Better By You, Better Than Me becomes a 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyright violations (WP:COPYVIO)

Comment: or, if thought appropriate, redirect to an article associated with the election in Nevada's second congressional district in the 2010 Democratic primary, which is, I believe, policy under .  I can't see any other reason to retain this article based on what I see, and on a brief search; |notability is certainly asserted but I don't see anything that meets Wikipedia's policies, at least as far as I understand how notability works with respect to lawyers at trial
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:N)

Comment: Unnotable attorney who had an arguably notable case, but |notability is not inherited
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Google News only turns up the subjects website.  Appears to be self-promotion or  and does not appear to satisfy |general notability guideline or any other notability standard that I can find
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:External links (WP:ADV||WP:GNG)