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 Keep. Random Fixer Of Things (talk) 19:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Severna Park Mall[edit]

Severna Park Mall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Small regional shopping mall with no claim of meeting WP:Notability in article. Fabrictramp (talk) 19:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. I found this and this rather easily, as well a couple of decent-looking references on Google News -- all behind paywalls, of course. That's not a whole lot, but it could be enough. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 20:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have rewritten the article and added the two sources. Like I said, it's not a whole lot, but it's a start. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Good work on the rewrite. Unfortunately, both of the sources added are from the website of the company managing the mall, so don't establish notability. :( --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• That's true. The newspaper sources on Google News might, however, if Google will let me read them (or if someone with full Google News access can help out here). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 23:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - this property previously went by "Severna Park Marketplace" [1] which may skew search results. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 03:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I think I said that backwards, but you get the picture. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 10:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 20:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep lots of news results [2] that seem non-trivial... there are plenty of sources here. --W.marsh 00:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. —User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Is only a stub now, and does have some references. Stub status is not grounds for deletion. Sebwite (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2008 (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.