- 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. Tone 16:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Barnea & Co.
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Barnea & Co. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It is somewhat surprising that consensus was to keep two years ago. None of the sources are strong support for WP:ORGCRIT. They are a melange of mere listings (they exist...) or they are mentions in passing where it is confirmed that they may have worked on cases (which is what a law firm does). Working for potentially notable clients or on potentially notable cases does not make a company associated with it notable ( WP:INHERITORG). They may be a large(?), international law firm, but that by itself does also not establish notability ( WP:ORGSIG. An internet search has not resulted in what can be considered significant independent editorial coverage about the firm. This article is essentially yet another outlet for a company profile. This is not what an encyclopedia is for. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete as per WP:INHERITORG. This kind of situation comes up with some regularity. Just because a lawyer or law firm has worked for notable clients does not, in itself, make that lawyer or law firm notable. Cosmic Sans ( talk) 21:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Weak Delete. (seems I !voted keep two years ago - however I've been lured to the deletionist dark side over the years, though I'm still fighting back and am at present at a 56% delete !vote rate [1], I will also note WP:NORG got an overhaul in the interim) This is a large law firm with not insignificant media coverage - it is plausibly notable. However, the current article is promotional, and sources in it don't establish notability. Finding in-depth sources is not easy (as there are lots of mentions in cases or passing mentions you need to filter). It is possibly someone will WP:HEY and save this - but maybe not. I will note that on the Hebrew Wikipedia this has been deleted for a few years - Hebrew wiki talk page. Icewhiz ( talk) 15:11, 26 August 2019 (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.
- 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. Tone 16:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Barnea & Co.
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Barnea & Co. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It is somewhat surprising that consensus was to keep two years ago. None of the sources are strong support for WP:ORGCRIT. They are a melange of mere listings (they exist...) or they are mentions in passing where it is confirmed that they may have worked on cases (which is what a law firm does). Working for potentially notable clients or on potentially notable cases does not make a company associated with it notable ( WP:INHERITORG). They may be a large(?), international law firm, but that by itself does also not establish notability ( WP:ORGSIG. An internet search has not resulted in what can be considered significant independent editorial coverage about the firm. This article is essentially yet another outlet for a company profile. This is not what an encyclopedia is for. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete as per WP:INHERITORG. This kind of situation comes up with some regularity. Just because a lawyer or law firm has worked for notable clients does not, in itself, make that lawyer or law firm notable. Cosmic Sans ( talk) 21:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Weak Delete. (seems I !voted keep two years ago - however I've been lured to the deletionist dark side over the years, though I'm still fighting back and am at present at a 56% delete !vote rate [1], I will also note WP:NORG got an overhaul in the interim) This is a large law firm with not insignificant media coverage - it is plausibly notable. However, the current article is promotional, and sources in it don't establish notability. Finding in-depth sources is not easy (as there are lots of mentions in cases or passing mentions you need to filter). It is possibly someone will WP:HEY and save this - but maybe not. I will note that on the Hebrew Wikipedia this has been deleted for a few years - Hebrew wiki talk page. Icewhiz ( talk) 15:11, 26 August 2019 (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.