- Buchalter, A Professional Corporation (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
This article was speedily deleted by editor SamHolt6,then immediately and officially deleted by RHaworth. I have reached out to both respectfully, politely, and in good faith to initiate a conversation that would allow us to reach a consensus. However, despite multiple attempts to reach him, I have never received a response from SamHolt6. It is odd that he would suddenly delete a page, but then not be interested enough to reply to any of my communications. RHaworth did respond, but his only response was that the title is “ridiculous and spammny.” There has been zero effort to reach a compromise. Surely, the legal name of a corporation (and/or individual) is neither ridiculous, nor spammy.
This article appears to have been flagged because of a separate and previous article written over a year ago. At the time the previous article was deleted, it appears that a consensus had NOT been reached. This company is verifiably notable, and is mentioned in numerous reliable, authoritative sources. Furthermore, all content that was posted is easily and verifiably accurate. Numerous companies in this industry have Wikipedia pages (and their legal names are the titles).
Further, per Wikipedia’s guidelines, we are all to treat each other with respect and civility (and to always be nice, welcoming and helpful to new users). Please review the actions that have been taken, and allow this company page to exist, or at least provide guidance as to what changes need to be made so that it will be allowed to exist? It is frustrating that no one has given me the courtesy of suggesting what would make this article uphold to Wikipedia guidelines? Thank you in advance for your time. It is important that Wikipedia remain neutral and strives to treat everyone equally. Missfixit1975 (talk) 21:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)Missfixit1975[reply]
- @Missfixit1975: I can't speak to the content of the article as it was just before it was speedy deleted a few weeks back. But, if the content of the article was substantially the same as it was when it was deleted last year, then yes it is a candidate for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G4. Further, consensus was reached; there was no opposition to its deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buchalter. As to the name, while I can see where you are coming from as Buchalter does use that terminology, it does not appear to be the company's actual name. Your terminology appears in the footer of the web site, but nowhere else. Their own social media feeds fail to mission the suffix, and in the rest of the website they refer to themselves simply as "Buchalter". So, yes, I tend to agree with RHaworth that the article name is indeed spammy. As to other law firms who have articles here, I'm sorry but it is of no matter to the existence of this article. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for why. Please understand; WP:DRV isn't a second chance deletion discussion. You can ask for a WP:REFUND and have this article undeleted into your userspace where you can continue to work on it. If you do so, let me know and I can assist you in helping to determine if the article meets our standards for inclusion. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse and salt. The WP:G4 was correct, although WP:A7 or WP:G11 would have worked equally well. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep deleted. No reason has been presented to explain how deletion process has been followed. Deletion review is not AFD round 2.
If you wish to report incivility or other rudeness, this can be done at WP:ANI; however, before doing so, consider whether the conduct is in fact incivil and rude, or is just people telling you something you don't want to hear. Stifle (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse my deletion and propose salt. Per Roy Smith above except I hate these cryptic G4, A7, etc. G11 means nothing to me - I think of it as {{db-spam}}. "Telling you something you don't want to hear" - well put. Miss Fixit, I tell you with as much civility as possible that in my opinion you are not an appropriate person to be contributing to Wikipedia: you are here to promote your company instead of helping to build an encyclopedia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:52, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse. Exeunt Vikings stage left, singing lovely Spam, wonderful Spam... Guy (Help!) 08:22, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse No procedural errors occurred in the deletion of the article. SportingFlyer talk 02:16, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse Appropriately deleted. Recreating an article that was deleted via AfD at another completely inaccurate title raises a few eyebrows, to say the least. Enigmamsg 04:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
