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. SarahStierch (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aksan Law (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The main source relied upon [1] serves primarily as a directory of recommended law firms. The other sources seen in a search are primarily directory-type results. These results, coupled with the Legal 500 result, do not meet the corpdepth requirement for significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. nn. Taroaldo ✉ 18:31, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per nom.--Rapsar (talk) 15:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per WP:SPAM and my standards. There is not even a real claim of notability, such as a major case or transaction, or a former judge who serves as counsel. 40 attorneys in a large city such as Istanbul is not an especially large firm, and 30 years is not especially old for a law firm. Bearian (talk) 19:21, 19 June 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.