Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim, Drooks, Lincenberg & Rhow, P.C.


 * 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. clpo13(talk) 18:37, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Bird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim, Drooks, Lincenberg & Rhow, P.C.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable boutique law firm. Awards mentioned don't confer notability. Sources that mention the firm are passing coverage about other topics, not the firm itself, failing WP:GNG and WP:ORG. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as corporate spam with no indications of notability or significance. Wikipedia is not a web host for this firm's client prospectus. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)


 * delete no indication of significance. more smoke than substance.Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2017 (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.