Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BCG Attorney Search

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. L Faraone 02:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BCG Attorney Search

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

BCG Attorney Search appears to fail WP:CORPDEPTH in that the multiple cited sources do not offer any significant or substantial coverage of the company. Instead, the coverage is trivial, such that BCG is included in a list of similar organizations, or a webpage/article written by BCG is quoted or linked elsewhere. There is no support for the statements about how and when the firm was founded. There is no description of the company's business focus in the cited sources. Binksternet (talk) 19:34, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Researched and added reference (number 2) to how and when firm was founded, as well as focus of the business. Aostler (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You added a reference to Zoominfo.com. Zoominfo allows users to edit their own entries, so this cannot be considered an independent source. Binksternet (talk) 21:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. czar · · 20:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. czar · · 20:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with Binksternet and also find the content overtly promotional. Deb (talk) 21:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above; article created by advert only WP:SPA. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for all the reasons already given by Binksternet, Deb, and Ohnoitsjamie. NOTE: Related articles created by the same user include Hound.com, LawCrossing, and Harrison Barnes (entrepreneur); the last of these is also at AFD. --Orlady (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge all the subsidiaries together. Individually, these headhunter firms are really run of the mill HR firms. There is no need for multiple articles on what are essentially one company, and there is no evidence that any of them are notable except for the size of the totality. Bearian (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The articles to merge would be Hound.com and LawCrossing, into this one. Bearian (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2013 (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.