Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, L.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   keep as notable, sourced. Bearian (talk) 20:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Gallop, Johnson &amp; Neuman, L.C.

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

NN law firm. Advertorial from user:Gjnstl. WP:COI, WP:CORP. -- Y not be working? 20:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Week keep Needs some work, but I think they're notable: prominence in their area.DGG (talk) 23:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Good prose, but it sounds like it was written by a professional PR person. It would be a great write-up for the firm's website or for a St. Louis legal wiki, but they fail WP:CORP.  y'  american  (wtf?) 01:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (Though my vote may count for nil...) I realize that because my username User:Gjnstl is highly analogous to the subject matter of the article, one may come to believe it to be automatically advertorial. However, I took great care to keep the article neutral in tone and content (and I don't work in PR). The article sticks to the facts only. Numerous third party neutral sources show notability of the firm and certain members. If it were truly advertorial, the WP article would look much more like the main page of the firm site than how it is currently written. Gjnstl (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, I removed the speedy deletion tag in the first place. This article is written in a neutral tone, not as an advertisement. The article asserts significance, and the sources seem strong. --cremepuff222 (talk) 07:28, 5 July 2008 (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.