Deletion of White Dalton Motorcycle Solicitors

Comment: as this article is little more than a |public relations exercise. A mere metention in two news stories is |not evividence of notability. There is no significant coverage to indicate that this firm of solicitors has participated in a notable court cases, nor has it any notable staff or partners, nor is the firm itself notable in any way (size, history, development, campaigning or research), and falls well short of the requirements of . Articles based #NEWS|purely on news coverage fall outside the scope of Wikipedia, especially news stories which are promotional in tone and content
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Spam (WP:SPAM||WP:SBST||WP:CORP||WP:NOT)

Comment: Found two articles of coverage relating via http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22White+Dalton+Motorcycle+Solicitors%22&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=a Google News. Notable with respect to its specialist and unique field of practice in serving an often misuderstood and maligned group of road users. To quote  "Large organizations are likely to have more readily available verifiable information...smaller organizations can be notable...arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)

Comment: The Times Online article doesn't really provide significant coverage IMO, it just cheers them for having a cute name and a nice looking webiste. Other than that, fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG)