Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westfield North Rocks

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 Merge to North Rocks, New South Wales. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-11 04:34Z

[edit] Westfield North Rocks

Westfield North Rocks (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No assertion of notability, fails WP:CORP. One Night In Hackney 22:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep. Notable and interesting topic. Rebecca 22:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Can you explain how this meets WP:CORP, WP:LOCAL, WP:MALL or WP:RS? Notability is not established by the content of the article and being an interesting topic is, as far as I know, not an inclusion criteria for an article here. Vegaswikian 00:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as non notable. There is no proof that it is notable, please provide some, then I will change my vote. Even if this was particuarly interesting, which it isn't, that is not a valid argument. J Milburn 23:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per J Milburn Kamope · talk · contributions 23:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per J Milburn. This topic is neither interesting nor notable. Soltak | Talk 23:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. According to WP:CORP, a business is notable "If the organization has been the subject of multiple non-trivial, reliable published works whose source is independent of the organization itself." This article has none of that. I would also point to WP:V: "Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor. The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not with those seeking to remove it." --Elonka 22:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Boilerplate text does not significantly improve a deletion debate. Please enligten us on which of the content is contentious and worthy of challenge or removal? Somehow I doubt the depth of your knowledge of the Sydney retail market.Garrie 10:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
It would be helpful if you looked at the article at the time Elonka made that comment, it looked like this. One Night In Hackney 12:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Significant shopping centre within the northwestern suburbs of Sydney. I tend to hold the view that corner stores and neighbourhood centres, unless highly notable, should not have articles at all, while regional shopping centres, often critical to the growth and development of a region, should have articles written according to WP:NPOV and other appropriate Wikipedia policies. Alternatively, we can have a Wikipedia devoid of interesting content which presents the facts in other articles without context. Orderinchaos78 15:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Orderinchaos78 17:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Rebecca & Orderinchaos78. And as opposed to what Elonka claims, the article should not be deleted if it's not notable enough, but should be merged to the North Rocks, New South Wales article. JROBBO 05:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Rebecca, Orderinchaos78 & JROBBO, if that fails then merge to appropriate suburb article. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Rebecca. In the Sydney market, Westfield North Rocks is notable for it's presence so far from train/ferry services. Elonka, remove the unsourced content don't delete the article. We've been here before... go re-read your own conversation at The Westfield GroupGarrie 10:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Is there a newspaper article somewhere that mentions the problems that this mall has due to its distance from train or ferry services? Saying it's 26 km from mass transit is one thing, but better would be to have a source saying why that's an issue, if that is intended to be part of the assertion of notability. -- ArglebargleIV 15:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Maybe there is. If I had been asked at either the article itself, or even at List of Westfield Group shopping centres in Australia, I may have been convinced to find a source for you.Garrie 03:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep --Scott Davis Talk 13:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge/redirect with North Rocks, New South Wales article (or other appropriate regional article). -- ArglebargleIV 15:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Garrie, would like to see better verify sources would change vote like J Milburn--Hu12 07:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per all of the above. There is nothing wrong with this article, and seeing better verified sources is why you put the sources tag on it rather than deleting it. At worst do what Arglebargle and JRobbo said and merge and redirect it until more material becomes available, although I don't see why even that should be necessary DanielT5 13:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, first source is primary (by subject's parent company), second is trivial (street directory listing). Still entirely fails WP:N, any number of WP:ILIKEIT !votes aside. Seraphimblade Talk to me Please review me! 20:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't think a mall is notable just for being a mall. It is like the sewage treatment plant; an unavoidable part of almost every region, but not something we normally need to discuss. --Brianyoumans 20:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note to closing admin During this discussion, this was speedy deleted, restored about 20 hours later, brought to deletion review, and the deletion review closed with regard to this article (by me) because this AFD was running. Have fun, and think about letting this run an extra day. GRBerry 20:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

*Weak keep per this search. Addhoc 11:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment - reviewing the search results I concur...
  • Merge to Westfield Group. Addhoc 19:01, 10 February 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.