Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibrachy Law Firm

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 speedy keep. A valid rationale for deletion has not been provided. It's not a hoax (verifiable as per [1]), and deadlinks do not disqualify Wikipedia articles. No prejudice against a renomination that provides a valid rationale for deletion. For examples of valid deletion rationales, see WP:DEL-REASON. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrachy Law Firm[edit]

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

Reason Joseph.nemo (talk) 03:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC) Hoax and no sources that are working[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 August 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. I get the joke.., you are supposed to give "reason" in an AFD nomination. There is hoax tag in article which I will remove. It is listed in legal500 and is real. Speedy keep because nomination provides no rationale for deletion. --do ncr am 05:45, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 August 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:02, 2 August 2016 (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.