Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadmalls.com

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 keep (non-admin closure) WP:SNOW, no objection posted SunDragon34 (talk) 00:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deadmalls.com[edit]

Seems like it hardley passes WP:WEB and seems to be borderline for WP:N. Article has been nominated for CSD in the past. -Marcusmax (talk) 00:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith ^talk 21:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the sources cited in the article are sufficient. (At least three of those sources are primarily about the mall, not just passing references.) There are other media mentions, of varying length, listed at the website. Zagalejo^^^ 01:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to have had sufficient coverage in reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. --Caldorwards4 (talk) 02:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems to have paid its dues in reliable sources, therefore establishing notability. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Satisfies the Wikipedia notability guideline WP:N with substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sites. The story at National Public Radio, for one, says that the first place potential investors in a mall go is Deadmalls.com to see what it says about the mall. Google News Archive shows 64 hits over a span of several years [1]. Edison (talk) 03:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:WEB. Several instances of independent news coverage by reliable sources (National Public Radio, Columbus Dispatch, CNN and Sacramento Bee for example). Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 14:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and suggest WP:SNOW. The article clearly passes WP:WEB. Multiple, in-depth, reliable sources (and many more that have come out since the article was created as well). IronGargoyle (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2008 (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.