This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Pittsburgh and its
metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move page. The possible ambiguity with
Paul Reed Smith is now resolved with a hatnote (
[1]), so there doesn't seem to be any other reason to diverge from the
WP:NCCORP guidelines.
GTBacchus(
talk)22:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose, based on the linked guideline. A hatnote such as {{distinguish}} can be used to resolve confusion between the two topics.
Propaniac (
talk)
17:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Puffery / COI
There have been repetitive edits to puff up the article. The article does not in it's current state adhere to Wikipedia's particularly neutral stance.
Histnewbie (
talk)
06:59, 3 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Some proposed changes
This
edit request by an editor with a
conflict of interest was declined. A reviewer felt that this edit would not improve the article.
Information to be added or removed: To the end of the History section please add – Also in 2018, Entertainment and Media Industry Group partner James Sully was named one of the top 25 lawyers of the year, according to Music Business UK and Centtrip Music’s Legal & Accountancy 50 almanac.
Explanation of issue: The section does not have the most up to date information on the firm and it’s employees.
^Ingham, Tim (4 December 2018).
The Legal & Accountancy 50 2018(PDF). London, United Kingdom: Music Business UK and Centtrip Music. Retrieved 29 January 2019.