Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sierra Vista Mall (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:21, 20 October 2007

Sierra Vista Mall

This article was originally kept at its prior AfD. DRV overturned this result, but could not reach a strong consensus to delete outright. The matter is resubmitted to AfD. Deletion is on the table, particularly concerning the question of whether the sources offered in the article qualify as reliable and non-trivial. Xoloz 13:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I read the previous AfD and noted that some added that economical impact was noteworthy. However, I cannot find it in the article. If there is a reference to the noteworthy economical impact that can be added to this article, I could see keeping it. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 15:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per my comment in the DRV. All of those sources are obviously too local, many of them trivial, like "Sierra Vista Mall will hold a community outreach fair at 10 am", thus not really independent of the topic (anything, even local resturants, apartment buildings, nursing homes, local politicians (which fail WP:BIO btw, supermarkets, etc can have that many local sources). WP:HEY doesn't apply nither as the only thing added was an infobox, and the spam wasn't removed. Jbeach56 19:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A mall's whose name did not get any mention in the local press, that would be a notable phenomenon. There has been absolutely no clue whatsoever as to why this mall should have a wikipedia entry. It has to be proven it is notable, not that it is not, and I maintain that this mall could be deleted per A7, "no claim to notability".--victor falk 22:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but a7 is for things that do not say anything that might indicate notabiity at all, like having major stores, and only if one accept the extension of treating malls as companies) Believe it or not, there are many much sketchier mall articles, suitable for speedy as no meaningful content. DGG (talk) 05:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - citations being to local is not a valid reason to delete, and if it is then you had best be prepared to remove entire categories Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 06:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
God I despise you people. The only reason this article is hard to expand is that available sources all have to be paid for. Kappa 07:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 *'''Delete''' but a7 is for things that do not say anything that might indicate notabiity at all, like having major stores, and only if one accept the extension of treating malls as companies) Believe it or not, there are many much sketchier mall articles, suitable for speedy as no meaningful content.  '''[[User:DGG|DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG|talk]]) 05:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' - citations being ''to local'' is not a valid reason to delete, and if it is then you had best be prepared to remove entire [[:Category:Buildings and structures in Toronto|categories]] <font style="background-color:#ddcef2;font-weight:bold;color:#000;">[[User:Exit2DOS2000|Exit2DOS2000]]</font><small><small><sup>•[[User Talk:Exit2DOS2000|T]]•[[Special:Contributions/Exit2DOS2000|C]]•</sup></small></small> 06:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
+*God I despise you people. The only reason this article is hard to expand is that available sources all have to be paid for. [[User:Kappa|Kappa]] 07:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)