Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ice Miller

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:05, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ice Miller[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Simply an advertisement for a local company with only trivial local attention about and nothing beyond the simple PR it is, there's nothing amounting to actual independent notability and substance and searches mirror this; the next is the fact it was deleted in 2008 as advertising which says enough there, including the fact this is exactly what it is now: Complete with "clients", "services", "PR awards", etc, that alone violates our advertising policies because it's blatant advertising, with no hopes of meaningful improvements. To the state the obvious, this was actually contributed to and watched by what seem to be company employees and, also worth noting, this was tagged for G11 in 2008 after restarting, but removed with the basis of "Send to AfD", but we all know our standards and policies have changed, so "improve it" is not applicable for ignoring WP:NOT. SwisterTwister talk 18:28, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- just a law firm going about it's business with WP:PROMO copy. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Article reads like (self-)promotion, and I don't see how it could easily be resolved. Aside from that, I'm not sure whether it even satisfies WP:N and WP:V. A quick Google search has not provided any sources which would support notability (it's mere existence does not qualify per WP:DIRECTORY). As mentioned, it was tagged for speedy deletion in 2008. From the Article history, it seems notability was asserted (sufficiently to reject speedy deletion), but I was unable to find the arguments supporting notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talk2chun (talk • contribs) 18:30, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteNo form of notability has been presented.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Soft delete According to the Indianapolis Business Journal, [1], Ice Miller is the third largest of the "The big four" law firms in Indianapolis. We currently have articles on all four.

Taft Stettinius Hollister LLP
Barnes & Thornburg
Ice Miller
Faegre Baker Daniels

Much of this page could be trimmed, and as a stub including the history of company name changes, it serves an encyclopedic purpose. There are currently about ten Wikipedia pages that have or could have Wikilinks. One way to do this would be to merge this article to a new article on the big four, where currently the other three would remain standalone articles.

A natural champion for the article, someone who deprodded it, has been indeffed, so a soft delete represents the state this article would have, had the prod gone through. Unscintillating (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2017 (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.