Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russell Jones & Walker

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 current version as blatant spam. Per discussion article can be recreated as long as it follows our guidelines, especially WP:NPOV, see also WP:COI. ~ trialsanderrors 19:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Russell Jones & Walker

Russell Jones & Walker (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Bump from speedy. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-16 22:55Z

• Delete per nom. Split Infinity ^(talk) 23:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The nomination was neutral and intentionally had no justification. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-16 23:50Z
• Keep. Russell Jones & Walker are a very prominent solicitors' firm; they are well-known for their aggressive work on behalf the Police Federation, trying to keep policemen out of legal trouble. I know the article at present reads like an advert but perhaps this could be cleaned up? Sam Blacketer 23:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ugh, blatant advertising, fails WP:COI. Delete, unless this aspect can be significantly improved upon. Pathlessdesert 00:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Sam Blacketer and Complete Rewrite. Very often in the news, as this BBC search shows. Incidentally, we have an article on Declan Swan but not on Claims Direct; something of an anomaly? Tevildo 01:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Tevildo news search examples and Sam Blacketer. --Oakshade 05:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

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.