Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fish & Richardson

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The result was nomination withdrawn. MER-C 01:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fish & Richardson

Fish & Richardson (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Questionable notability. The awards smell fishy because two of the awards are for next year: "For 2007, F&R was ranked #16 (tie) on the AveryIndex's list of the Top 25 Prestigious Firms to Work For [1], a ranking that accounts for both firm prestige and associate satisfaction. [...] For 2007, F&R was ranked #17 on the "Best 20 Law Firms to Work For" by Vault [3].". Contested prod, like some wider input. MER-C 13:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Gigantic and Speedy Keep, major firm ranked by Vault (company), who publishes all its rankings "for next year". Puh-lease! - crz crztalk 13:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• A very likely keep per above and about 1.4m ghits. However, I can appreciate the nominator's concerns about the article in the state it was in before the Prod. And if it is contested, process dictates in a round-about way that it appear here for wider exploration. Maybe confusing for those who work outside the law (figuratively speaking), and I probably would have done the same. The fact that another editor expressed concerns was also instrumental in the article's appearance here. Further to that, it's amazing how a Prod can improve an article (usually by the original author) to a state that is semi-respectable. Also, I don't believe the nominator entered a "vote", as stated "like some wider input". Cheers. Bubba hotep 14:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Historic and currently very important and large law firm. --Oakshade 16:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. Following the links for the awards show that they correct. Notable, historic law firm. (Added some additional info, highlighting notability - history, notable clients.) — ERcheck (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Nomination withdrawn, closed. MER-C 01:52, 16 November 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.