Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Day Pitney (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Day Pitney
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

No evidence of any notability. All the refs from 9 onwards simply acknowledge that some legal names have worked at the company. The earlier refs are press releases and similar that confirm the firm exists, that it has been involved in take-overs but nothing about the firm that helps to establish notability. Searches find adverts and listings etc but nothing that gets close to WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 19:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  Velella  Velella Talk  19:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Velella  Velella Talk  19:25, 13 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to think that there must be more to be found on the predecessor firms, Day, Berry & Howard LLP and Pitney Hardin LLP, which were both quite old at the time of the merger. I would move to draft with a draft note indicating that this is an area suitable for expansion, if sources can be found. There is some interesting coverage of the merger by Above the Law, which basically notes that it papers over the respective weaknesses of the two firms, without really making them competitive with bigger firms. BD2412  T 19:45, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * !Vote changed to leaning keep per improvements and indications of further room for improvement. The article still needs to be refactored to more clearly represent the full history of the predecessor entities as elements of the current entity. BD2412  T 03:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree with BD2412, I'd move this to draft and let someone potentially improve it rather than delete. I don't have time or interest in working on it, but just a quick search reveals that there does appear to be meaningful media coverage of this firm, so it's not completely unthinkable that it would warrant inclusion.  Here are some potential sources that someone could pull notable references from if they wanted to improve this article:


 * https://www.law360.com/firms/day-pitney/articles?article_related_content=1
 * https://www.daypitney.com/news. (Not the press releases, obviously, but the media articles referenced)


 * DocFreeman24 (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep compliance with WP:BEFORE isn't always trivial.  As BD2412 pointed out the firm(s) have gone through many name changes over the years.  Real compliance with BEFORE would have required you to do meaningful web searches on all of them.
 * FWIW I added some references, and additional material... Geo Swan (talk) 02:50, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , I think your comment accepts that Day Pitney was a notable topic, while thinking the article should be draftified, because the current state needed improvement. Since then  and I did expand the article considerably.  Would you consider looking at the expanded article?  Geo Swan (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Of course!  &, this is much improved!  Major kudos for all your work on this article.  I vote keep at this point!  Well done and thank you for taking the time!  DocFreeman24 (talk) 01:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:ORGCRIT. KidAd   talk  21:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Added material and sources since nomination demonstrate compliance with WP:GNG, so any other guidelines are immaterial. Historically significant law firm associated with prominent attorneys. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:35, 31 October 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.