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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:01, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Mansfield[edit]

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

Run of the mill law firm. Nothing out of the ordinary indicated in the article or found in online searches. The significance of the "Law Society Excellence Award" seems somewhat minor, and other than a brief blurb in Law Society Gazette, seems only to be noticed in the firm's own press releases. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:25, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - obvious puff piece. No wikilinks. Nothing notable. Atlas-maker (talk) 19:24, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete On multiple searches (Google, Highbeam, Questia, Guardian) I am finding nothing that would indicate this is anything more than a firm going about its business. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 19:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep if the "how to" guides are notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:40, 21 October 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.