Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/11 King's Bench Walk Chambers

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. postdlf (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11 King's Bench Walk Chambers[edit]

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

Non-notable set of barristers' chambers (akin to a non-notable law firm) - fails WP:ORG. Having notable members doesn't make the chambers de facto notable ukexpat (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Some of the members may be notable but I doubt the chambers themselves are. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I see trivial mentions at The Guardian and The Telegraph, but mere references to its existence are not evidence of notability. If someone can find more sources that discuss it in detail, the article can be recreated. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:37, 6 September 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.