Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanner De Witt

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. slakr^\ talk / 05:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tanner De Witt

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

Non-notable company that does not meet WP:CORP or WP:GNG. Contested proposed deletion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only 57 hits in Newsbank. All of them are passing mentions, mostly of the form "According to X, a partner at Tanner De Witt..." Therefore fails WP:CORP as noted by nominator.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As stated, there's no indication of sufficient notability. It also seems that much of the previous and remaining content somewhat had the underlying intend to be promotional, probably due to conflict of interest. --Cold Season (talk) 17:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 05:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2014 (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.