Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TPP Law Limited


 * 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. clear consensus.  DGG ( talk ) 01:43, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

TPP Law Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

My searches simply found nothing good (aside from this) for this basically unacceptable article and simply looking at the article says it all. I'm not sure who "Mjohnson" was but they moved this from their userspace in March 2010 and it has basically stayed the same since then. SwisterTwister  talk  06:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 15:59, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - rather blatant WP:PROMOTION page that even if was reliable would probably need to be completely deleted and started over. However I don't see any significant coverage and I think this fails WP:CORP. FuriouslySerene (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Pinging interested subject users and .  SwisterTwister   talk  06:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:00, 3 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - this is a non-notable law firm according to my usual standards. There are no notable lawyers involved at any level of ownership. They are not an old firm with a long history. They are not unique as a boutique law firm.  There is no significant coverage in reliable sources. They appear to do only what any law firm should do to represent their clients zealously.  This page is little more than spam.  We are not a web host for for-profit law firms. Bearian (talk) 17:42, 4 November 2015 (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.