Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3PB


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Of note is that 3PB was moved to Paper Buildings, from where it was nominated for deletion herein, and this AfD discussion was titled "3PB". NorthAmerica1000 13:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

3PB

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable set of barristers' chambers (akin to a non-notable law firm) - fails WP:ORG. ukexpat (talk) 00:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:34, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Since the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales defines "chambers" primarily in terms of "a place", I don't think that WP:ORG is applicable, since you are also dealing with the notability of a building. I think it is fairly obvious that "3 Paper Buildings" is an address. A copy of the definition is here. James500 (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * In the context of this article and all the others about sets of chambers, "chambers" are akin to a law firm (even though they are technically not as barristers are self-employed etc) and the articles are written as such, about the chambers fields of expertise etc, so, irrespective of what the CC says, for Wikipedia purposes WP:ORG does apply. We could write articles about all the interesting buildings in the Inns and indeed some exist already (Temple Church), but they wouldn't need all the guff about the barristers who practice there.--ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that they are akin to a "law firm" which I assume means a partnership of solicitors. According to the Final Report of the Royal Commission on Legal Services (1979), there had, since 1902, been a rule of conduct prohibiting any practice in the least degree resembling partnership between barristers, though this did not apply in respect of work overseas. Common purse arrangements are not allowed. They do share the services of a clerk (with whom they have an individual relationship) and the expenses of the chambers. They do not share clients, work or profits. In particular, members of the same set can represent both parties in the same case, something that solicitors in partnership are not allowed to do. This information could be out of date by now, but if this set goes back to the nineteenth century, that may not be an issue. James500 (talk) 15:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Read my comment more carefully: technically there are not, but in the context Wikikpedia and the way these articles are written, they are. (I know the technicalities, I am a barrister myself, albeit not in private practice).--ukexpat (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I am wondering whether we could do something with this. There are quite a few results for "3 Paper Buildings" in GBooks. It seems the building was, for example, formerly the headquarters of MI5: . It seems John Galsworthy had chambers there, and it is where he wrote "Dick Denver's Idea": . And so forth. Perhaps the article could be moved and rewritten. Or perhaps we could do a selective merge of the various chambers into articles on streets. James500 (talk) 13:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Paper Buildings is red linked at the moment. Perhaps this article could be moved there and broadened out to include the entire street. There is for example a detailed article here. The Common Bail Office was at 14 Paper Buildings: . And so forth. James500 (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅. The article requires further expansion, but should completely immune from deletion in its present form. James500 (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve. Problems fixed. Paper Buildings obviously satisfies GNG. James500 (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I also advise the adoption of a similar solution to the other articles that have been nominated for deletion. The streets are probably notable, and the addresses are plausible redirects. One finds them in lots of sources going back hundreds of years. James500 (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * 3PB is now a redirect to Paper Buildings. It was originally a redirect to ABC News Radio. James500 (talk) 21:43, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:32, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 06:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep We have a good alternative to deletion per WP:PRESERVE. The abbreviation 3PB doesn't seem to have much competition - the Northrop N-3PB is the closest and still loses out in Google ranking.  Andrew (talk) 18:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.