Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adelson, Testan, Brundo & Jimenez


 * 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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:12, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Adelson, Testan, Brundo & Jimenez

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a semi-procedural nomination. I don't like speedy deleting articles that have sat around for 7 years; if nothing else, it means NPP have reviewed and checked it originally without intending to do so. Nevertheless, I can't find any obvious coverage that would allow me to improve this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:04, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I did requested the speedy deletion as there no indication of importance in the article for the organization, and I believe my statement still applies. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  16:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  16:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Devoke water  17:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, borderline speedy, as nothing in this article indicates that it is anything more than an average law firm in its space. BD2412  T 18:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom . Nika2020 (talk) 23:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Olaf Kosinsky (talk) 10:08, 2 August 2020 (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.