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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:02, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southmall Manurewa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Fails WP:N and WP:CORP. Jauerback 15:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, "It was one of the first shopping malls in New Zealand". Mathmo ^Talk 20:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• An additional comment: I'm going to quote from another AfD, while I don't entirely agree with every detail it contains important truths: "All malls should have articles here because they are the local landmarks of our times, often replacing Main Street or town squares. They have as much influence on towns as highways, schools, or stadiums. They are substantial economic enterprises and raise major issues involving land use, taxation, and globalization. Too many people love to talk, read or write about them for us to play silly games and try to exclude them. This may be hard for people to believe, but in the real world, they are far more important than the latest Virtual community, Pokemon card, or webcomic." Mathmo ^Talk 21:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions. -- Mathmo ^Talk 21:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment But even so, we do not generally have separate articles about the Main Sreet or town square of most towns. We just give them approriate mention in the article on the town. Smallish shopping centers which are not "super-regional" or enev "regional" can be similarly mentioned in the article on the town. Edison 21:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep If cites can be provided about it being one of the first, then definitely notable Recurring dreams 22:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and source. It sounds like a notable mall but sources would hopefully confirm it. Capitalistroadster 02:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Mathmo.-gadfium 05:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletions. —Thewinchester ^(talk) 12:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep Article has now been converted to a well-structured stub and has some references for the information. However, I personally cannot find details to confirm if it is one of the first centres in NZ. If someone with Factiva or LexisNexis, or the BOMA/Property Council databases could step in and confirm this it would be appreciated. Thewinchester ^(talk) 02:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Obvious claim to notability, decent stub. Rebecca 03:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete Nicely written article, but I can't see that it satisfies WP:N. About 2% smaller than a regional mall, and even many of them get deleted. There needs to be a more solid ref for it being the country's first mall, than a website saying "it is believed." Even a small mall like this could be notable for historicity, although 1967 is not very early for the oveerall history of shopping malls. Needs solid references showing that it is somehow unusually important for a mall of its size. Edison 21:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepJameeserano 22:13, 7 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.