Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sive, Paget & Riesel (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 delete.  Sandstein  19:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Sive, Paget & Riesel
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails in passing WP:GNG Akronowner (talk) 12:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Akronowner (talk) 12:09, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  12:10, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  12:10, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * DELETE: fails the SIRS test The Ace in Spades (talk) 12:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC) — The Ace in Spades (talk • contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Waskerton (talk • contribs).
 * Mild Keep Would seem to be notable, are they mentioned in any peer-reviewed law journals? They seem to have a few landmark cases in the environmental field. Oaktree b (talk) 15:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:00, 22 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak delete - they had a notable founder, and they had notable clients, but is that enough? Bearian (talk) 20:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete There are mentions so we know the firm exists and had some high profile cases. And appears to have had notable founders. But there's nothing written *about* the company. The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 21:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:CORPDEPTH.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:24, 8 January 2021 (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.