Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euro-Industriepark

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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Euro-Industriepark

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD removed with little or no rationale beyond the source being added (a start, at least) dealing with the mysterious cutting down of trees around the area. The fact that the area exists isn't in question, but that doesn't automatically confer notability in the absence of the usual requirements. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Has the nom done WP:BEFORE? FloridaArmy (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The nom has performed a suitable amount of research, yes. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:46, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing a lot of results on Google News. Are they just mentions? Don't we usually keep articles on major malls or developments? Why not this one? The shopping district has a Bauhaus (company) store and other things that have gotten quite a bit of coverage. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You and I may be seeing slightly different results on Google News (pretty sure it's location-sensitive), but an awful lot of what I'm seeing in both English and German amounts to just mentions. There's plenty of "New bus routes which will serve this location" and "[Store X] will open here", but that's all pretty run-of-the-mill. I'll admit that Fox News used a shot of the McDonald's outlet there for their coverage on the McDonald's Twitter hack (the one which resulted in the anti-Trump tweet last year), but that's just a "file photo", rather than any reason beyond that. You're right that major malls get articles, but that's usually because a major mall has the relevant level of coverage to justify an article. The presence of a notable chain doesn't automatically confer notability on the location either, that's where sources need to come into the picture. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 08:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we only keep articles on subjects that are notable. For malls that means that independent sources have given significant coverage to the mall itself, not just to companies that operate stores in the particular mall. Nothing suggests that this mall is notable.--Rpclod (talk) 02:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that this place is historically notable in its previous incarnation as Germany's first industrial park rather than as a modern shopping centre. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 13:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't think this shopping complex has anything very special about it, I think it is just like lots of others, but there are a few decent mentions on Google, the rest being as BigHaz as explained, just run of the mill press announcements. The article itself looks very much like a copy of that which is on the . However I think that as a place, which exists, and has some reasonable independent sources, it should be kept because it is within the basic notability requirements. Regards Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also the title in English should be Euro Industrial Park, you are using a German title. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- lacks notability per review of available sources. Coverage is in passing or incidental. Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not a directory of shopping centres. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We don't keep articles about places because they exist. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2018 (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.