Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patton Creek Shopping Center

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. Nishkid 64 19:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patton Creek Shopping Center

Shopping centers/malls are generally not notable, nothing in the article states why this particular shopping center is notable Justinmeister 00:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Millions of shopping centers exist in the world, and this is no more notable than any other.--TBCΦtalk? 01:05, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found some references, which is usually possible for most large shopping centers. This one is big (600,000 square feet), so it's more notable than most. There are probably a lot more references in sources that aren't available for free online, such as trade publications and back issues of newspapers. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 01:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per TBC wtfunkymonkey 01:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just another mall. Not especially large compared with List_of_largest_shopping_malls_in_the_United_States. Smallest shopping mall in the US top 20 in 2004 was 1.9 million square feet according to that list - i.e. you could fit 3 Patton Creeks into it and still have 100,000 square feet left over . Bwithh 02:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, nothing special about. Not particularly large or anything else. JoshuaZ 02:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per apparent consensus. Stammer 06:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesn't help the closing administrator to just add a "pile-on vote". It helps the closing administrator to provide a proper rationale for why this article should be kept or deleted. You can start by looking at the references added to the article by TruthbringerToronto and discussing whether they are enough to satisfy WP:CORP. Uncle G 13:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - As others have pointed out and as the references you have added confirm, this is just a mall. Stammer 16:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Still lacks multiple nontrivial coverage in mainstream media. And when they say "in the Birmingham suburb of Hoover" without saying what state, that smacks of "local interest only" and sounds like a press release for local papers. Edison 16:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. WP:CORP doesn't require that the sources be mainstream media, only that they be reliable. The missing state name is a valid point. I have added the state and country to the first paragraph of the article. Could you please take another look at the article and evaluate the current version? --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 16:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. Note that reliability is not the only criteria that allows the inclusion of an article, as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.--TBCΦtalk? 19:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information." is not an indiscriminate criterion for deletion. The types of things that it applies to are listed, and this is not one of them. The relevant section of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not is "Wikipedia is not a directory" (of businesses). For ensuring that we have the WP:CORP criteria, which work very successfully when applied. As WP:CORP encourages editors to do, please address what published works have been cited, and whether they are of sufficient depth and provenance to satisfy the criteria. Uncle G 08:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a directory. I live in Alabama and I have actually been to the Patton Creek Shopping Center. There's nothing that sets it apart from the shopping centers in Birmingham, Alabama, much less shopping centers in general. The only reason someone would be looking for information on this place would be to find a restaurant or movie times. It's a brand new place. It hasn't had time to have any significant impact on the community or the State of Alabama to warrant inclusion in an enyclopedia. If it had been the site of riots and protests or an infamous killing spree by disgruntled store clerks--- that would be different. All that happens there is that people buy books, clothes and gifts and then eat out afterwards. Nice place, but I assure you it is not notable. OfficeGirl 21:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Kf4bdy ^talk ^contribs 23:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see two references in the article. One is from the local chamber-of-commerce about one of its members (and thus not independent) the other is about the mall's "architectural concrete masonry" from the Alabama trade organization that the company that did the masonry work belongs to. So even if the article were to be rewritten about the architectural concrete masonry of this particular mall (and I really cannot see that), it still wouldn't have two independent sources. Moreover, this is just a normal mall with the normal stores functioning in a normal way, so there's nothing particularly notable about it. JChap2007 00:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I think both sources are independent of the shopping centre. It's not as if they were reprinting a press release. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 07:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The sources exist because it is the job of chambers-of-commerce/trade associations to promote their members. They're not reprinting press releases, they're generating them. JChap2007 19:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable mall, though there are sources cited, but they are neither independent nor reliable. Wait for a while and sees whether this mall becomes more notable. --Ter e nce Ong _{(T | C)} 04:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. One argument against the claim that all malls are the same is the vigorous competition between real estate developers for the combination of attributes that will bring in tenants and shoppers, which means that mals try hard to differentiate themselves from their competitors, and the fact that malls sometimes go out of business (see http://www.deadmalls.com for more). So here are some questions that I would ask about any mall. Is it a transit hub, with a bus terminal part of the mall, or is it hostile to transit users? Do the mall's security personnel have a reputation for bullying or racism? Have their been documented incidents of these behaviors? What is crime like in and around the mall? Was there a controversy about building the mall, perhaps because the land was originally zoned for other purposes? Have the mall's owners made substantial contributions to local politicians? Many of these questions can only be answered with access to the local newspaper's archives, which makes it difficult to put together an article from thousands of kilometers away. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 07:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment And restaurants try hard to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Heck so do gas stations. While I agree that the above questions about malls are interesting, they hardly make the malls notable. JoshuaZ 07:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As I don't believe in rampant deletion of articles and that there should be a good reason for an articles deletion, I agree that the perhaps obscure location might hinder the locating of independant sources (at least on the internet) that might indicate the uniqueness of the mall. It might be an idea to ask users from the Alabama area (such as the original creator of the article, User:Bucs2004) if they could shed some light on some local sources. Justinmeister 21:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - As Requested: I don't believe in the rampant deletion of articles, but I don't believe in having articles that don't meet Wikipedia's criteria, either. I promise, promise, promise you that the local sources in Alabama do not treat Patton Creek Shopping Center any differently from any other mall in the Birmingham area. In fact there are a handful of identical malls that were built in the Birmingham area recently, including Patton Creek, and they're regular, everyday, ordinary malls. It's just not a big deal, escpecially now that it's built. It's a nice place, just like a lot of other nice places. Not notable-- not even to Alabamians. OfficeGirl 19:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The "ACIA - ConcreteWorks" link has the look and feel of a press release, especially based on the last paragraph. The Chamber of Commerce page is a little better, but doesn't leave me believing that this business meets WP:CORP. GRBerry 16:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a very notable project. The shopping center is part of a major revitalization of the area which includes a number of shopping areas, restaurants and public areas. The center required major reworking of surrounding highways, including the first "flyover" in the area, which was named the Birmingham Business Journal's New Construction Project of the Year. [1]. Patton Creek exists in the shadow of the Galleria, Alabama's top non-paying tourist attraction, bringing in 14 million people a year. The construction also raised issues relating to the government's right to imminent domain when private land was taken to built highway on/off ramps. This article should be rewritten to note its notability, not deleted because it is poorly written. -- AuburnPilot^talk 17:33, 4 November 2006 _(UTC)
- Comment As an attorney in Alabama who has actually been to the Patton Creek Shopping Center I can tell you that the events surrounding the construction of this place, including the legal history, were (YAAAWWWWN) uninteresting and ultimately unnotable. The thing that's notable is the Riverchase Galleria, and Patton Creek is just one of many shopping centers that have been built in the area. The "flyover" is marked as the "Galleria" when you use the exit off of the highway (not "Patton Creek"). It is, as you say, merely in the shadow of the Galleria. It is, as you say, merely part of an economic expansion. Being the next-door neighbor to the Galleria is not an assertion of notability. The Birmingham Business Journal is a minor publication that exists primarily as a propaganda tool for major business interests in the area. There's no hard-hitting neutral journalism to be found there, and besides that your argument would suggest that every year a new article should appear in Wikipedia depending on which new construction is the best thing currently happening in Birmingham, Alabama. Patton Creek belongs in a directory, not an encyclopedia. OfficeGirl 19:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Some content could be merged into a list of "lifestyle centers" in Alabama or major shopping centers in the Birmingham metro, or even into the Riverchase Galleria article - but there's no need for a separate article here. (That's why I started Bhamwiki.com) --Dystopos 18:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing sets this mall apart from hundreds of others. NawlinWiki 05:53, 7 November 2006 (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.