Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capital Retail Park


 * 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   merge to Leckwith Development.  So Why  09:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Capital Retail Park

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

What makes this retail park any more notable than the hundreds of others in the UK? More than enough is mentioned in the New Cardiff City stadium article. As it is, the article seems little more than an advert. Nouse4aname (talk) 13:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I feelthat this page should stay because it provides relevant information about the retail park which is being built. This retail park does not really have much to do wit the CCFC/Blues stadium and is part of a development to improve Leckwith. The new staium page should not mention in detail and should have a link to the retail park page instead. I don't feel that this is an advertisement as the status column shows the development as it progresses. Your point about other retail parks in the UK is valid, however I live in Cardiff and am writing about a retail park that I use and lso live near. It is up to people who live near the retail parks (and also other features in the town/city) to make/edit the articles. I feel tat it should stay but would follow any suggestions you might have to improve the page.
 * RE: Capital Retail Park

Thanks, Lwebdan (talk) 20:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete May or may not be notable eventually, but has not opened yet. Most likely it won't be: only 16 stores, about 300,000 square feet, which is below our usual standard for shopping centers. DGG (talk) 02:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * DeleteNon notable. And perhaps WP:OR. "relevent information" is not a reason to keep.  This is an encyclopedia, not a place for original information.  If other publications create meaningful articles about this place we can then create an article.Obina (talk) 12:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Leckwith Development. The target page badly needs some content and there is material here that would enhance it. TerriersFan (talk) 17:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Leckwith Development. TerriersFan, that's an elegant suggestion.  --Lockley (talk) 04:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. As I stated above, more than enough information is included in the New Cardiff City stadium article. There is no need even for the Leckwith Development page either, which serves as little more than a bunch of links. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:16, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. ... and it needs moving out of New Cardiff City stadium! That article should deal just with the stadium whilst Leckwith Development should take an overview and deal in more detail with those parts of the development that are not individually notable; that's what will move it from being a link farm!. It is not a case of deleting this page more where the content goes. TerriersFan (talk) 11:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that the Leckwith Development is notable aside from the stadium - it can't just borrow notability from the new football ground. I don't see how a minor athletics ground, a retail park and a housing estate can be either individually or collectively notable. If they weren't part of the football ground construction, would we even consider an article for them? Nouse4aname (talk) 12:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * A lot of people don't consider the athletics stadium 'minor' and the demolition of its predecessor was controversial. There are more than sufficient sources to stand up a page on what is a major development, in my view. TerriersFan (talk) 03:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect and I too agree that info about a Retail Park does not belong in a Article about a Stadium. However, a 'Parent' Article of the group that is the force behind all this redevelopment does seem notable when the entire scope of developments is considered. Once the junk is trimmed out, this (the current Capital Retail Park Article) would make an excellent 'section' in that Article. So to would a 'section' about the Stadium. The current Leckwith Development is in serious need of a cleanup and Cite'ing if it is to survive any AfD itself though. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  06:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.