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. --Core desat 05:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jamestown Mall

[edit]

Non-notable mall, fails WP:RS. Has also been tagged for neutrality for a long time with no improvement whatsoever. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 03:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, and WP:N, and WP:RS. Nenyedi • ^{(Deeds•Talk)} 13:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete view - notability requires multiple, independent sources attesting that there is something special or different about this mall (i.e. notable) or that something newsworthy happened here. This article has none of these. Simply existing or being a large mall is not enough. Bridgeplayer 16:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a super-regional mall per the ISCA standards, with 1,010,400 square feet of gross leasable area, per a ref I added to the article. There are 454 news stories which could be used to improve and expand the article per the Google News search [1]. Many of these are run of the mill every-day events, but some go into greater detail on the history , arguably poor siting choice, and impact of the mall on its region and beyond. Someone with university library privileges or a subscription to a news archive could get through the annoying subscription barrier to determine which articles have more in depth coverage. [2] from 2004 looks like in depth coverage, as does [3] and [4]. Edison 18:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the super-regional size and scope, and based on the precedents set in a string of recent AfDs for retention of such articles. Alansohn 03:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Size ≠ notability. Significant coverage from reliable sources = notabiliy. This does not have it. i ^said 06:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom.Harlowraman 06:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N. Another non-notable mall. Yeesh! :P Faithlessthewonderboy 08:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Size does determine notability, which - given that Wikipedia is supposed to be a practical reference source for real people, rather than an academic exercise - is a reflection of how many people are likely to be interested in looking something up. Golfcam 09:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:BIG. --B. Wolterding 12:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 18:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - sure its big but so what? Its a mall but we are not a shopping directory. What is notable about it? Has there been a notable murder here, or robbery, or circus held here or a nude painting festival or anything notable or interesting? Bridgeplayer 23:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a somewhat larger non notable mall. --Stormbay 02:24, 27 August 2007 (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.