Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galbraith (property consultancy)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2019 August 21.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Galbraith (property consultancy)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I don't see that this estate agent is any more notable than hundreds of others. It carries on its routine business of selling property (and related products), and sometimes the properties are of interest to the press. The coverage of the company itself seems very sparse, and I don't believe that it meets our revised notability guidelines for companies. The page was created by an SPA/COI editor without any proper disclosure. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 06:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SIGCOV. Business listings and mentions. scope_creep^Talk 10:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: In fairness, the original article went through AfC and a couple of subsequent edits have been proposed via the Talk page, following the processes recommended for connected contributors. However, as to notability, the references are a mix of routine takeover/renaming announcements, market surveys by the company, and coverage of particular transactions in which the firm has been involved, and from which notability is not inherited. These are sufficient to confirm that this as a firm going about its business, but I am not seeing evidence of encyclopaedic notability. AllyD (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2019 (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.