Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Dalton Motorcycle Solicitors (2nd nomination)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

White Dalton Motorcycle Solicitors[edit]

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

Unremarkable company, despite the odd mention in the press. The article reads like an advert. As a UK-based biker I am aware of the company but certainly wouldn't consider them to be "the leader in this field of law" as the article assert (with a reference that doesn't support the leader claim). There are lots of similar companies in the UK and I can't see why this one is a) notable enough to have an article on wikipedia or b) any more notable than the other firms providing a similar service. Biker Biker (talk) 08:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as a UK biker, aware of company but wouldn't say that they are the "leader in this field," and support that the reference doesn't support this. Written like an advert by an editor who after the last Afd nomination it appears created the supporting The Royal British Legion Riders Branch article. Supported on grounds of lack of WP:NOTABILITY and resultantly WP:ADVERT. Rgds,--Trident13 (talk) 10:15, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen the (incredibly badly written) RBL Riders Branch article. I have now re-written it as that is definitely an article worth saving (unlike this one!). --Biker Biker (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice job on the re-write of an article that needed to be preserved - as you say, unlike this one! Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 16:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The single substantive news story [1] is more about a UK phenomenon of law firms not generally advertising their specialty, in the opinion of the author, as US firms typically do (DUI, divorce, etc). Having a legal specialty is no more notable than having a medical specialty. The fact that not a single other media outlet since 2008 has found White Dalton notable enough to write about is quite telling. Two stories [2][3] with passing mention that they were a racing sponsor in 2009 don't make the subject notable, any more than purchasing advertising space anywhere else would be notable. --Dbratland (talk) 19:09, 10 July 2010 (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.