Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Legal Media

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. Sockpuppetry concerns are left to be considered elsewhere as appropriate. RL0919 (talk) 15:26, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Global Legal Media

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Wikipedia is not a place to promote things or publish your thoughts. From a Google search about this subject, it’s not suitable to be on Wikipedia. Gabriel (talk to me ) 11:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Companies. Gabriel (talk to me ) 11:33, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NCORP. Event management and consultancy company. No notability. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:53, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per norminator. Clearly not notable and fails basic WP:GNG. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete clear non-notable subject. Morpho achilles (talk) 13:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sources are PR press items and many hits from Legally India for some reason. Long way from GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 18:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per nom. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 05:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:I made the stub because its a resource used in my field (law), but I also couldn't find that much information and hoped others might know it better. Not sure the best way to expand it, but if it's deleted it's deleted. Lambdull (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC) Lambdull (talk) 07:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments : It looks like Lambdull is connected to the account QuicksmartTortoise513 and Vivek Thazhathattil as they help to improve the article while looking new to Wikipedia. I think I have to ping @Liz: to check on those accounts.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 15:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While I am new to Wikipedia, I am not connected to the account, and simply accessed this page through suggested edits on the user page. QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I got this article in 'suggested edits' to 'add links between articles'. I'm not connected with any user. Kindly exclude me from your speculative nonsense. Vivek Thazhathattil (talk) 16:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppetry : We now have five new wikipedia users working so hard to build up the article. This looks so ridiculous I have to be pinging @Bearcat: as well.
Lambdull
QuicksmartTortoise513
Vivek Thazhathattil
TradukasKlare
Akhil sachin --Gabriel (talk to me ) 20:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just know that we are not sockpuppets, and are currently learning editing techniques. One cannot simply call an account a sockpuppet simply because an account is trying to defend themselves. QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Though I am fine with allowing the article to be deleted if found as faulty or inaccurate by the Wikipedia community. QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 21:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The nominator, Gabriel601, has been blocked for sock-puppetry. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:13, 23 October 2022 (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.