Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gepp & Sons Solicitors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 01:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Gepp & Sons Solicitors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Originally created in 2009, to this date it still doesn't have one reference, and is tagged WP:Orphan. Soon after creation this article was tagged Speedy, but cotested by the creator who has only ever editted this article and one other to add a singular link into this article. Having checked via various online and offline sources for suitable WP:REFERENCES, the answer is simple: there aren't any, except directory listing to confirm that the firm exists! Hence it fails WP:NOTAB, and ends up and as unreferencerable WP:ADVERT Trident13 (talk) 20:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete' no evidence of notability. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Notability not established with no WP:RS --Artene50 (talk) 05:04, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.