Talk:Baker & Daniels

Notability

Other than being a law firm with lots of lawyers (a few who are notable), what has this firm done that is notable? Dethlock99 (talk) 17:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I think given the size of the firm, the clients it represents, and given that its founders and early members and subsequent members included several notable people, and its value as a historical article, that the firm itself is notable. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

According to wp:NRVE "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability; it is not enough to simply assert that a topic is notable without substantiating that claim. Substantial coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject constitutes verifiable evidence of notability, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines." I didn't tag the article for notability because I'm sure that they are notable. It still should be sourced. Dethlock99 (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The firm is mentioned in a historical context in Gugin, the source listed in the article where it is noted an an important firm in the past and that it has grown into a large firm. There is this article [1] on the Indiana Historical Society website. A search of google books turns up a book on the history of the firm, several New York Times articles regarding the firms activity in some cases, and several other items where the firm has coverage. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 22:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Great! You know your stuff! Dethlock99 (talk) 18:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Faegre & Benson

Since Faegre & Benson and Baker & Daniels have now merged to one firm, known as Faegre Baker & Daniels, the two articles should be merged into one under the same name.