Talk:Westfield Group

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shopping Centers, which is an attempt to better organize and unify articles relating to enclosed shopping malls, outdoor shopping centers, and dead malls. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
Flag
Portal
 Westfield Group is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Companies Portal
This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating assessment scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Westfield Group article.
Article policies

It's my understanding (and this is supported by Westfield's own web site) that Hornsby was the first Westfield to be built. See http://www.westfield.com/corporate/about/history/index.html

Not Exactly - It's their first enclosed center as they exist today, and deserves that title, but there was a earlier open-plaza type development in Blacktown. Westfield Hornsby (My Local Westfield) today retains none of it's first incarnation, it was bulldozed in 1999 for a long overdue rebuilding. --210.84.33.90 11:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Decision to drop "Shoppingtown" came earlier than June

See these grafs (http://sptimes.com/2005/06/01/Business/If_you_didn_t_call_th.shtml) from the St. Petersburg Times:

Westfield Group has stopped calling its U.S. malls "shoppingtowns."

The Australian developer, which drew a lot of attention with the unusual monicker when the company made landfall in the states three years ago, began phasing it out May 1.

And this chunk (http://search.starnewsonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050427/COLUMNIST07/204270317&SearchID=7323073377675) from the Wilmington-Star News, dated April 27 (which would make the "Sunday" mentioned fall on May 1:

WHAT'S IN A NAME: Not "Shoppingtown," after Saturday. Westfield Shoppingtown Independence mall in Wilmington will shorten its name to Westfield Independence beginning Sunday.

The Australian-based property management company manages 126 shopping malls in four countries. The company has decided that "Westfield," is the brand name consumers use and recognize, said Chuck Willetts, marketing manager at the Wilmington mall.

All the Westfield properties are slated for the name change, but don't expect signage to change immediately. Mr. Willetts said signs would reflect the new name only when they need replacing.

So we have a decision that seems to be effective May 1. I went digging on Westfield's corporate site for a press announcement to confirm, but currently half or more of the internal links on the site do not work. Hurrah for them!

Actualy, the name drop came even earlier in Australia - Some time between 1999 and 2001, as Westfield Hornsby came back from it's development Shoppingtown less. --210.84.33.90 11:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The photo in the article was taken in 2005 and still clearly says Westfield Shoppingtown.--Garrie 02:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'Historical' Malls

This is silly: "a practice that has been universally criticized in the U.S. as taking away from the historical importance of many malls". Are we seriously saying that 'everyone' in the US criticised Westfield for calling its malls shoppingtowns because of the historical importance of the former malls on the site, malls which only date back to the 60s and 70s? Lisiate 21:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I too read this comment with some surprise. 220.233.169.46 23:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Are there any published articles, commentary, etc. that show that the name was criticized? I would suppose that some people would indeed think that a mall name has "historical importance" (although I might not personally agree), but unless there is some actual evidence of this, perhaps we should just drop this phrase or re-write it. Captadam 16:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eastridge Mall in San Jose, California

I don't believe Westfield owns this one...Ranma9617 21:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If you look at the Eastridge Web site, it clearly states the mall is owned by General Growth Properties. --Coolcaesar 22:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed it. --Steve Pucci | talk 16:21, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I work for Westfield. The Company does not own Eastridge, it is a General Growth Property.

Actually Westfield does own a mall called Eastridge, it's just not the one in California - it's in Gastonia NC, about 20 minutes East of Charlotte North Carolina.

[edit] Westfield Today / Criticism

  • Recently, Australia’s most respected public affairs television program reported that Westfield’s CEO was forced to apologize for a series of clandestine campaigns against corporate rivals

Was that Today Tonight, or A Current Affair? Sorry, that was tounge in cheek - but seriously, what show was it? When was it, because the edit has been there "too long" to leave it as Recently. --Garrie 02:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

  • [1] - ABC news item with tenant complaint on high rents and forced fitouts in the ACT--Golden Wattle talk 20:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, GW. I have updated the article with your source. Garrie 01:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Retail Space

32 Trillion square metres is a very large area. There are a million square metres in a square kilometre and a trillion is a million times a million, so this means the area is 32 million square kilometres. According to wikipedia, this is about the size of the land area of Russia (17,098,242 square Km), Canada (9,970,610) and India (3,287,2632). It is also bigger than the continent of Africa (30,370,000 Square Km).

[edit] Too many articles

I recommend that we not have an article on every single shopping mall, unless such mall is notable on its own. Perhaps we need a "List of Westfield malls" page? --Elonka 03:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

And if you want to do that, since they regularly get either a consensus to keep or a no-consensus-keep on AfD, get a consensus to merge them, rather than trying to sneakily do it on a not-heavily-watched page. We had a discussion about this with regard to Australian Westfields recently, and the proposal was duly rejected; I very much doubt you could get a consensus to do it globally. Furthermore, many of the centres you tagged had clear claims to notability, such as being the largest centre in said state. Rebecca 04:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Though I agree that some shopping centres which have claims to being (for example) the largest centre in the country, do have some claim to notability, I think that most don't. For example: Westfield Bondi Junction and Chatswood Chase, neither of which, in my opinion, has any claim to fame per WP:CORP. I recommend that these types of articles be merged into a master list somewhere, or possibly into the articles about their respective communities. --Elonka 05:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
What on the earth is the benefit of this scorched earth policy? Westfield Bondi Junction is a massive shopping centre in Sydney which gets up brought often in the press - though I've never been there, I'd certainly say it's notable. Rebecca 23:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
If it gets brought up often in the press, then some press mentions should be included as a reference in the article, to allow for verification of the information. --Elonka 22:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
This is just being querulous. This isn't about benefiting the encyclopedia; it's about you using any tool at your disposal to try and expunge as many shopping centres as you can from Wikipedia, notability be damned. Rebecca 23:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
You sure like that word querulous. But, um, no, you've got me wrong about being "anti-shopping mall". If there's a genuinely notable shopping mall, and its article has references which confirm its notability, I'm totally fine on it. But if I'm on New Article Patrol and find any article which has been created about a for-profit business, and the only reference in that article is the business's own website, and there's not even a hint of any other type of notability in the article's text aside from "this is a big mall," then yeah, I'm going to flag it as needing references, or possibly as {{db-spam}}. On some of these articles, I've done my best to be gentle, tagging them with {{local}}, {{prod}}, {{unref}} or {{primarysources}}, but when you go through and systematically revert every tag I add, even if it's something as innocuous as a simple request for expansion, then I really have no choice but to send it to AfD. I really wish you would just leave the {{local}} tag on these articles. It does absolutely no harm, and simply recommends that the article be expanded or merged. Isn't that a much preferable request, than actually going to the trouble of an AfD? --Elonka 05:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I concur with Elonka's position on this issue. Rebecca, please review core content policies like Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. In particular, the "What Wikipedia is not" policy notes that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. If those malls are truly important, someone should (or will) dig up references for them, as I have done for my favorite shopping center article, Pruneyard Shopping Center. --Coolcaesar 07:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
They should have references, but this assertion that they need them to avoid being deleted is simply pulling policy out of ones arse. There is not one set of rules for every other type of article on Wikipedia, and one set for shopping centres. Rebecca 09:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Rebecca, have you read the policy at Wikipedia:Verifiability recently? --Elonka 18:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I have. Nowhere in that policy, however, give you carte blanche to delete any unreferenced article you do not like. If that were the case, 3/4 of the encyclopedia would be liable to be deleted. Rebecca 00:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Hey, Elonka, that sounds like you should have been around months ago for my rants:
All Westfields are the same
Westfields in Australia
They didn't get off the ground due to lack of consensus, which is what it takes to get things done around here.
Anyway, there is a list of Westfield malls, in The Westfield Group article. Feel free to expand it. If it gets big enough, feel free to hive it off.Garrie 02:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References for whole-of-group

Unless we move this to List of Westfield Group shopping centres, User:Elonka is correct in stating that it needs some (preferably) secondary or tertiary references.

Whilst I have no problems finding reasonable references regarding issues at single Westfields locations - which have gone onto the articles for those specific locations - I am having some difficulty tracking down anything more generic.

Of course if this is a facetious exercise I could always reference-bomb the article with every secondary reference off any Westifield PickATown article but that would not be too constructive.

Lack of references for this article will see it moved to List of Westfield Group shopping centres for the Australian ones, and List of Westfield Group shopping malls for the ones in other countries. Please don't go listing this article on AfD until those articles have been created - the approach should if anything be to merge the smaller articles into this one rather than deleting this article.

(I haven't seen anyone strenuously apply verifability tests to "List of Gee-Gaws in Placename" articles - anyone got anything different to add to that?)

The alternative will be some horrid template linking every Westfield shopping centre article. Which I will create, if this article is deleted. Garrie 03:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I have added several secondary sources and removed the primarysources tag. The article would eb imporoved with more secondary sources. Garrie 01:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article direction

Looking at Starbucks, there is an excellent article about a world-wide retail organisation. Not a single mention of an individual outlet location.

I suggest moving the list of Westfields locations to a seperate article and improving this article in the direction of Starbucks or one of the other FA-quality retail articles.

This type of suggestion has caused concern in the past so rather than bold editing I want to ensure there is a well mapped out plan before starting by seperating a significant chunk of the article. Garrie 23:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Having left comments to same direction on talk pages of several recent contributors, am moving list section to new pages: List of Westfield Group shopping centres in Australia and List of Westfield Group shopping malls for rest of world. If interested feel free to split the second article.Garrie 11:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
List articles have been created. Not sure if en-zedders say "shopping centre" or "mall"... sorry, kiwis, I dropped you with the UK/US locations.Garrie 12:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Balance

The Criticism section is quite long but there is nothing in the article discussing the benefits of TWG to retail... if they are this successful there must be something good about what they do???

Apart from that - how much westfield-bashing does the article need? Garrie 05:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please add pages to category

Please note there is now a category category:The Westfield Group. It would be appreciated - if you are working on a page please add it to the category.Garrie 11:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Typical features

Does TWG hold to a set of standards internationally or is it simply market-driven in each area? I notice that in Sydney at least, TWG are market leaders in:

  • accessability - access to both public transport and provision of extensive free parking
  • family friendliness - spacious, well appointed parents rooms for feeding / changing infants, including televisions, lounge chairs, play areas, pram-friendly toilet cubicle
  • disabled-friendly - well appointed toilet facilities for mobility-impaired customers
  • spacious - usually they feature well lit, wide corridors between shops, when compared to other shopping centres with similar leasable floor space
  • (apparently) high standards for take-away food - no doubt this is market driven as the dodgy operators can't pay rent but it is unusual to find take-away food that is inedible (note, not judging it for dietary balance here - there's plenty of fat-attack options).

It is unusual to me that these key aspects of what makes a TWG location different to one operated by the local real estate demi-mogul, aren't particularly discussed yet the criticism section is extensive.

By way of comparison have a look at Starbucks - which goes a bit too far to being a semi-operations manual for the new franchisee, but it's a handi comparison for a global operation.Garrie 12:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I think much of this smells of original research, unless good sources can be found to suggest that this is some sort of policy on Westfield's part. Much of this may be because Westfield tends to only buy (at least in Australia) larger, more successful and more notable centres which, in turn, are probably more likely to have the above characteristics. Rebecca 04:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't really agree with that view - I think their policies tend to (for example) make it difficult to be an independant kebab operator but as soon as you buy an Ali Baba Kebab franchise you get the support you need to operate at a level where you are profitable in the Westfields environment, and the franchisor tends to fight a lot of the big picture issues with centre operators.
Re: TWG only buying big, successful, notable centres - this is true, but then they develop them often to the extent that you cannot even see the original centre (eg: Westfield Hornsby was totally demolished and rebuilt, it now looks like a Westfields). Their early redevelopments (looking at Westfield Penrith, formerly Penrith Plaza) seem to focus on bringing the amenities up to the "ususal standard" - this is in the provision of parenting rooms etc.
Mind you I agree that currently I don't have any reference to allow writing about the above issues in the article, however I was presenting them here in the hope that someone may have good reliable references which would allow mention in the article. Garrie 02:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] unreferenced criticism

Following points on Criticism are unreferenced and will be removed in a few days unless solid references supplied:

  • ...typically branded as Westfield Shoppingtowns, a practice that has been widely criticized in the U.S - I will remove everything after the comma
  • Arcadia First, Save Our Downtionw Alliance issues
  • Renton, Washington issue

Is the plan to redevelop WhiteCity criticism? It should be referenced and moved to Current Operations. Garrie 03:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah Wikipedia's fabled and beloved "Criticsms of ..." sections. Always my favourite sections.
  • I dont see why the UK part is a criticsm and have moved it accordingly.
  • Without the "a practice that has been widely criticized in the U.S" is the former branding of their malls as Westfield Shoppingtowns really a criticsm. Perhaps that should be moved as well?
  • Westfield Bondi Junction has been... how is this different to any other shopping centre in the world? Its not just a problem caused by Westfield. The UK now has very strict regulations about the building of out-of-town centres because of the effect they have on town centre shopping areas. This largely has nothing to do with Westfield, who AFAICT only have one out of town shopping centre in the UK, which they acquired rather than built.
  • AFAICT all of the last two paragraphs are completely unsourced and should be removed. IMHO they are potentially libellous. Also is there a prize for anyone outside of Australia who knows what "Australia’s most respected public affairs television program" is?
Pit-yacker 14:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
The prize, I think, is a guest spot on your choice of A Current Affair or Today Tonight. When I last asked that question, (look up a bit) User:Golden Wattle replied with a totally irrelevant link (at least, I think it was irrelevant) to the quote at hand. But it was related to TWG so I inserted it into the article.
That TWG no longer use "Westfield Shoppingtown" in the US is.... not criticism, I think it is simply Marketing or Branding - AFAIK TWG continue to use the Shoppingtown moniker in Australia (certainly it is on enough of the Austalian photos - need to have a look at Westfield Penrith, it is a recent aquisisition).
I agree re: last two para, I have been steadily inserting well-referenced criticism (found whilst searching for what is already there) in preparing for removing the current unsourced text.Garrie 22:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok I have removed the last two paragraphs and move the Westfield Shoppingtown part to the introduction. I have also pulled the paragraph

"Westfield Bondi Junction has been seen as having a direct impact upon..." has I feel this is not the right place for this:

  • The evidence is specific to the effect of one mall. It should therefore be duscussed in the article about the mall, which it is, not the mall's owner.
  • Even though there is no doubt substantial evidence to show that successful shopping malls have a detrimental impact on traditional shopping areas, IMHO this criticsm is not unique to the Westfield Group and probably belongs in the shopping mall article. In fact, it probably isnt a criticsm of mall owners at all, more accuratly it is a criticsm of the planning regulations that allow mall owners to build large malls.
Pit-yacker 19:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Westfield Blacktown

I know it doesn't exist any more and it wasn't anything like what they build now. But it would be nice to have an article about their first location. It is well documented at the company website in their history document but I would like to know if anyone else has any online reference material? I would like to try to get to Blacktown city library but can't bank on it happening any time soon now... Garrie 10:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I would like to add to this. I would like it to be known who started Westfield and how. There is an amazing story associated with John Saunders who was one on the founders of Westfield. I would like somebody to expand on that. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peege11 (talk • contribs) 08:18, 8 December 2006.

[edit] Reliable Sources

This article (and the mall articles themself) tend too much to be compiled directly from Westfield press relaeases.

Company press releases are not the best source for material regarding that company - secondary sources are much more preferred. Whilst they may often be the same thing, the press release will hopefully be checked a little bit before being actually publised - so if you can find alternate references for the same information that would be fantastic.

I will be periodically removing primary references from the article - if the information is notable it should be easy enough find an alternate source.Garrie 01:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I especially note references to local importance of projects, cost of projects, and size of developments, in being critical/sceptical of the companies own press releases. I am sure any approximation in a companies press release is always spun in their favour, etc.Garrie 01:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

Why is this article named The Westfield Group instead of Westfield Group. The shorter form appears to be preferred by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name). --Scott Davis Talk 12:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point – I'd support renaming.--cj | talk 13:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
If you follow the link to the ASX site - you end up at Westfield Group. So a move is probably in order!Garrie 09:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Done now. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 12:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)