Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prien Lake Mall

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. Sandstein 08:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prien Lake Mall

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Prien Lake Mall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I could not find any WP:INDEPENDENT WP:SECONDARY sources for this mall. --David Tornheim (talk) 19:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regional enclosed shopping malls are notable enough for their own articles. You are kidding right? Based on what criterion of WP:N to you get that? There are countless completely insignificant malls all over the world. Do we honestly need an article on every mall? Wikipedia is not Yelp. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:49, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enclosed malls are generally the major retail center for a population area and can draw shoppers from miles away. Yes, we don't need articles for every strip mall as they are a dime a dozen in any city or town whereas most smaller cities or towns only have a single enclosed mall. Dough4872 23:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Our purpose is not to draw shoppers to big retailers. We are not here to promote (WP:PROMO) products, services, sales, create jobs, fix the economy, etc. Again what part of our guidelines on notability (WP:N) leads you to claim that Regional enclosed shopping malls are notable enough for their own articles.? --David Tornheim (talk) 00:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regional enclosed shopping malls are major landmarks in the cities and towns they are located in, as they attract shoppers from miles around and generate tax revenue and jobs for the community. Malls like these are often covered in secondary sources such as newspapers and television stations as they are a major part of the community they serve. Dough4872 01:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • From WP:GEOFEAT: Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability. Even million-sqft malls need secondary sources. The KPLC-TV article is borderline. If the mall is so important, it needs more reliable sources to attest to that. • Gene93k (talk) 12:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you look through the search results on Google, this mall is covered in secondary sources. The link I provided is just an example. Dough4872 19:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Google search results are filled with store locators, directory/map listings, announcements and store opening and closings. None of this qualifies as significant coverage. The search also yielded one significant article in American Press and a one-paragraph book mention. Other news coverage comes under the routine fight-at-the-mall category. The mall needs multiple significant secondary sources that attest to its importance. • Gene93k (talk) 23:27, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. we've been fighting about these ever since I came to WP 12 years ago. There have been various proposals which never passed, but there seems to be a rough line of between 500,0000b and 1,000,000 sq ft. this is in the middle. the deciding factor for me is the misleading "serves 217,000 shoppers. " It doesn't. It has a demographic area of 217,000 potential shoppers whom it might serve. . As for formal criteria, most of the refs are from the company, DGG ( talk ) 02:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DGG Thanks for the comment. I was about to ask your thoughts on malls and WP:PROMO. Now I don't have to.  :) --David Tornheim (talk) 06:02, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Routine business coverage is fine as long it is more than a brief mention. This is because we are aiming to satisfy WP:GEOLAND not WP:NCORP, therefore what constitutes significant coverage is dictated by WP:SIGCOV, not WP:CORPDEPTH. The Lake Charles book clearly highlights the mall's social and economic impact, and we have several sources where the mall "is more than a trivial mention" and is covered "directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content". This satisfies the WP:SIGCOV neded for WP:NBUILD.--Pontificalibus 14:43, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Pontificalibus I appreciate the extensive research, and considered changing my vote. However, I am inclined to agree with Gene93k that it is routine business coverage. I don't see it is as WP:GEOLAND--the mall is definitely a business. A number of the references are not WP:SECONDARY:
Secondary:
  • "Prien Lake Mall opens today in Lake Charles". The Eunice News. 13 April 1972. p. 7.
  • Jessica Hutchings. Lake Charles. Arcadia Publishing. pp. 8, 15, 19. ISBN 9781467113281.
  • "Prien Lake Mall experiencing growth with new stores". KPLCTV. 23 October 2013. Retrieved 5 January 2019. -- But this sounds more like an advertisement / WP:PROMO.
Trivial Secondary:
This mall not mentioned at all, hence WP:OR:
Primary (or self-created):
Broken:
If this article does get saved, I intend to delete the WP:OR, WP:PRIMARY and broken link. I would like to hear what others thing about some of the WP:RS that was added.
--David Tornheim (talk) 16:34, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to take you up on the statement that you "don't see it is as WP:GEOLAND--the mall is definitely a business." because I think it's important to look that before taking a view on sources. It is true the mall is a business: the business of renting out a building to multiple retailers. This does not mean that is not also a place, a geographic feature that is a local landmark. Indeed, WP:GEOLAND specifically includes commercial developments. There are even plenty of non-commercial geographic features that are run as a business, for example charging for entry. This does not mean they should be judged under WP:CORPDEPTH.
For WP:GEOLAND the bar is lower because Wikipedia also functions as a gazetteer. GEOLAND states "sources that describe the subject instead of simply mentioning it do establish notability". This is the depth of coverage required. It is more than a trvial mention but not much more.--Pontificalibus 20:30, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:22, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 22:59, 15 January 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Prien_Lake_Mall&oldid=879772277"