Talk:Tony Buzbee

This reads like a CV

Far too promotional... this needs to be neutral instead of reading like an advertisement or a curriculum vitae. K7L (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

This article typifies the main problem with Wikipedia

This article is obviously created by the subject or someone working for him to promote his business. There was a time when Wikipedia used to jump on garbage like this and delete it, but it doesn't seem to do that anymore and that's the chief reason Wikpedia isn't taken seriously. For the record, if Mr. Buzbee thinks he's fooling anyone, he's wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goateeki (talk • contribs) 15:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, this really is an offensive use of Wikipedia. The chief source of information in this article is the lawyer's own website, articles from PR Newswire (!) that cite to press releases by the lawyer and an online article or two authored by someone other than the lawyer, but in publications that no one would argue are of real consequence. If this guy gets a Wikipedia page, than every moderately successful lawyer in America (there are many) who's willing to devote an inordinate time to marketing and self promotion should have a Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goateeki (talk • contribs) 15:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Lacking citations

I just added a refimprove tag to the article. It has an alarming habit of making series of claims with some cited and some not, or putting citations at the end of a paragraph as if they justify all the content in the paragraph when in reality they are only a source for the final claim. For example, from the lead:

• Buzbee has obtained more than $1 billion in judgments and verdicts
• Buzbee has represented multiple governmental entities, including the State of Louisiana, and the Basque Government in the Kingdom of Spain.
• From philanthropy: Buzbee donated $1 Million to the Friendswood Methodist Church.
• From politics, twice: Buzbee has supported Democratic and Republican politicians at the local, state and federal levels.... That same year, Buzbee served as debate coach to Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst in his unsuccessful run for the United States Senate.

I may have missed something in the cited sources that I checked, but even in that case the citations should follow these statements as well as whatever else they're used as a source for. Mehmuffin (talk) 15:24, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

DWI worth mentioning...ONCE

The fact that he was arrested for one DWI and it was dismissed is pertinent information. However, mentioning it repeatedly as it is in this article is completely inappropriate, biased and unfair. I recommend someone knowledgeable about the subject matter edit the article so that it imparts knowledge and information, not bias. Fabiemay (talk) 00:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Everytime it gets added in the reputation section, the same person removes it. Whoever is removing it is more than likely associated with Buzbee and wants people to forget about his DWI and how he was able to accomplish a 1 year program in approximately 8 months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Persnackitylad (talk • contribs) 20:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree that the DWI and dismissal should be mentioned in the article. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

It can be mentioned, but ONCE. Most appropriately in his personal life section. Right way now with the big subsection saying "DWI" I think is undue weight. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 20:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

​​​​I forgot to add the template in the heading earlier, but there's a discussion about the DWI stuff over at WP:BLPN#Tony Buzbee.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 20:27, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with inclusion, but looking outside the BLP aspect, it doesn't need its own third-level heading per MOS:PARA. Same for the Real estate third-level heading. Larry Hockett (Talk) 20:54, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Large Number of Unsourced Claims

There are many unsourced claims on this page (the entire charity section, for example, which I’m not even sure is notable). I think it makes sense to remove these unsourced sections, and tone done much of the promotional language on the page in general, but before I do so I wanted to bring it here. These revisions are necessary, I think, on a page that has had promotional issues throughout its history. —Hobomok (talk) 17:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Ignore this—just realized much of the unsourced, promotional content was added today by new user (rubiojesse) with only two edits.

Username fits with employee of page’s subject, which fits with the history of adding promotional content on this page by single-purpose accounts. -Hobomok (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2022 (UTC)