Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Jacinto Mall
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] San Jacinto Mall
- Delete an admin removed my speedy request so taking it here, mall is nn, fails to claim any notability KnightLago 04:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
KeepWeak delete 1.2 million square ft of GLA per one of the references makes it a regional mall per WP:MALL . Edison 05:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Added: Per KnightLago: None of the sources in fact state that the GLA is over a million, but they consistently say it is "sprawling" and far too large for its community, suggesting that the figure does refer to GLA, but the Mall History site also says that only about 60 of 170 stores are operating, which means it is not functioning as a regional mall. The press articles I could find do not really support notability. Edison 14:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Gross leasable area and square feet are different. The site you are referring to here just says the mall is 1.2 million square feet. Leading me to conclude that they are counting the entire mall. The proposed guideline says the the "gross leasable area must be more than 1 million." Thus, in my opinion this still doesn't make it notable unless the GLA can be confirmed. But I was unaware of this proposed guideline, so thanks for pointing it out. KnightLago 13:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- A further thought, there is absolutely no assertion of notability. This needs to be done in order to qualify under the proposal at WP:MALL. From there, this can be done through "A significant amount of non-trivial media coverage." KnightLago 13:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- According to http://www.icsc.org/apps/dmmdisp.php?dispid=TX0280 the Gross Leasable Area is larger than 1 million square feet. --DMAJohnson 17:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Gross leasable area and square feet are different. The site you are referring to here just says the mall is 1.2 million square feet. Leading me to conclude that they are counting the entire mall. The proposed guideline says the the "gross leasable area must be more than 1 million." Thus, in my opinion this still doesn't make it notable unless the GLA can be confirmed. But I was unaware of this proposed guideline, so thanks for pointing it out. KnightLago 13:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Delete per failing WP:CORP. On another note: WP:MALL as you well know is proposed...not a guideline, not a valid rational for any arguements, hence trying to keep or delete an article based on a propsed guideline is makes an that arguement invalid. The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. References or links to this page should not describe it as "policy". --Brian(view my history)/(How am I doing?) 18:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment A guideline's acceptance hinges in part on whether it is referred to in AfDs. That seems to be how consensus is developed that the guideline is used and useful. At this point it is absolutely not the be all and end all of keeping or deleting an article, but it can hepl to avoid endless criterion-free handwaving arguments here.Edison 18:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep At 1.15 million square feet of gross leasable area, this is a large regional center that justifies inclusion under the proposed criteria specified at WP:MALL. Google News and other sources show numerous articles which can be added to the article. Alansohn 06:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Weak keep It seems to me like this mall probably has an interesting history which could be expanded in this article if someone cares to bother. However, the article is currently rather POV and doesn't describe the mall itself very well. --MatthewUND(talk) 09:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep It still needs a good deal of work, however I believe the mall is large enough and notable enough in the Houston area to warrant its inclusion. --DMAJohnson 17:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
