Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City Lade Shopping Mall


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

City Lade Shopping Mall

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tried to prod, but it was contested with the reasoning that it passes WP:NBUILD. It doesn't pass any notability criteria, including NBUILD, so i'm bringing it here. Thanks Zindor (talk) 21:08, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Zindor (talk) 21:14, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep I am the de-prodder of the prod on this notable shopping mall. It is one of the largest shopping malls in what is Norway's third largest city of Trondheim. I have added RS to show that the mall passes WP:NBUILD#2. This is a notable relatively large shopping mall with RS and it houses 74 separate businesses. WP:N WP:V. I will seek out more RS in foreign language later. Lightburst (talk) 00:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * NBUILD#2 requires multiple instances of significant and reliable third-party coverage.


 * Here's an analyis of the latest references you added to the article.


 * 1 Veidekke was an involved construction contractor. Primary source.
 * 2 Citylade is the business itself. Primary source.
 * 3 Jetgrunn, it seems, was a sub-contractor for Veidekke. Primary source.
 * 4 Trondheim.com, municipal tourism website for Trondheim, simply provides a listing along with details for nine other shopping centres. In the same level of hierarchy (index/subpage) you can find listings for small cafes. Existence is proven, but not notability.
 * 567The 'Retail Space Europe Yearbook' is an industry publication, and while City Lade's listing does show it has some significance within that industry, i fail to see how this establishes broad-enough notability to warrant inclusion on en-wiki.
 * 8 visitnorway.com. I can't locate any coverage of the subject on this website.


 * Just to spell it out; City Lade isn't a notable subject. Zindor (talk) 02:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Right ^ - as I said I did not complete the work of adding RS. Today I have added WP:RS, and there is much, much more available WP:NEXIST, (I used google translate in links) FYI: One can search the owner, the architect, the builder, the city and come up with much more RS. However I think we have a good article about the largest mall in Trondeheim, Norway... (a city which has 6 other malls). I revised the article to reflect the RS which has the mall at nearly 1 million square feet of retail space and 100 stores. I have to go look at the other mall that was prodded now. WP:NOTCLEANUP Lightburst (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You've managed to spam the other article with routine coverage, industry publications and primary sources. Where's the coverage that is truly independent, significant, and lets us know that the subject is notable to our readers?


 * Honestly i really think you should read the policy pages you are quoting, instead of pile-driving fluffery into articles in the hope people believe the hype. You throw the abbreviation 'RS' around like it's a freemason handshake.


 * We're an encyclopedia, not a directory for local businesses. I'm going to leave this discussion because i'm frankly tired of your edits and i'm towing the line between AGF and ADHOM. Good luck Zindor (talk) 15:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added news sources. I am sorry that you are upset - I originally only added primary sources from company websites simply to show management, ownership and architects, size, etc. I returned today and provided news and secondary sources. I often improve articles which are prods or AfDs - it is not personal. I am only one !vote and I rarely turn up just to say delete or keep. When I deprodded it was because I did a WP:BEFORE - I do not randomly deprod articles - sometimes I do a redirect or I actually AfD them. Anyway...I am sure more editors will be along soon - I have spend several hours of my time last night, and again this morning. So I will leave it to others and I apologize for the walls of text. Lightburst (talk) 15:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:14, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG. In finding and crediting sources, there seems to be a bias for English language sources.  Wikipedia has a systemic bias in that regard. WP:Not paper WP:Preserve AFD not clean up.   7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 10:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Kindly add these sources to the article or link in this discussion. No one has actually presented RS to meet GNG yet. Just paper tiger statements. Zindor (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Six days later, we're still waiting for those sources you state exist.   Ravenswing     16:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources added recently do not rise to the level of GNG and despite the admirable attempt at WP:HEYMANN it still does not meet notability standards. The sources added were not, in fact, news sources but rather real-estate and industry sources and therefore not independent or reliable. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep largest mall in Trondheim as well as Trøndelag County -> a regional landmark. lots of Norwegian sources exist.--RZuo (talk) 11:42, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , please see WP:ITEXIST, WP:LOCALFAME, and WP:LOTSOFSOURCES. Arbitrary "largest" qualities are not indicators of notability, actual coverage is.  And stating that "lots of sources' are available without providing any does not help determine if there is such coverage or if that coverage is in independent, reliable sources.  If you know of these sources, please provide some links. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In the interest of locating this wealth of Norwegian sources that is mysteriously alluded to, i had a look at the equivalent article on Norsk-wiki. In the sparse reference section there is a link to an article by Adressa, a Trondheim-based regional newspaper. Prima facie the newspaper seems like an acceptable daily regional for helping establish towards notability. There is secondary analysis in the linked piece but also a considerable amount of primary-source material from an interview with the rental manager. Thoughts on this source would be appreciated. Zindor (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * So is Zindor saying s/he did not try searching for sources before AfD? And still did not try using the buttons provided by Find sources AFD?--RZuo (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I satisfied the requirements of WP:BEFORE through my own means. I don't have to use the template you specify, and given the result you've posted below i'm glad i have my own ability to find and analyse sources. The source i linked isn't a game changer, i just thought i'd diligently share what i came across. I would have appreciated it if you spoke to me directly about your concerns over my ability to follow deletion policy, instead of posing that question to the rest of the editors involved in this discussion; it doesn't reflect well on you and perhaps you should read WP:AGF. I have a lot of respect for the experienced editors who've weighed in on this nom, and i'm sure if they have concerns they'll let me know. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 17:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete for failing WP:NBUILD, per nom. The sources do not have to be in English but they have to be independent and reliable. The bar has not been met here. Ifnord (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete- despite assertions that there must be sources out there somewhere, these have not been produced, and I have not been able to find them either. As it stands, the subject does not pass basic notability and verifiability requirements. Reyk YO! 14:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Anyone could get these links when s/he uses the Find sources AFD:
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/nyheter/2020/08/12/Lav-sol-f%C3%A5r-skylda-for-at-kunder-har-betalt-for-mye-i-p-hus-22465664.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/08/14/To-av-landets-st%C3%B8rste-dagligvarebutikker-er-i-Trondheim-22449306.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/nyheter/2020/08/10/Foresl%C3%A5r-%C3%A5-stenge-Haakon-VIIs-gate-for-gjennomkj%C3%B8ring-med-personbiler-22451718.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/07/16/T%C3%B8ffe-tider-for-kj%C3%B8pesentre-men-City-Lade-vokser-22294303.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/07/27/Flere-hjemme-gir-s%C3%B8ppelrekorder-22336229.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/04/26/En-av-to-av-fris%C3%B8rsalonger-som-gikk-konkurs-kan-likevel-holde-%C3%A5pent-21678826.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/05/13/Kjede-%C3%A5pner-to-nye-butikker-i-Trondheim-21810267.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/nyheter/2020/04/08/Handelen-er-st%C3%B8rre-enn-p%C3%A5-samme-dag-i-fjor-21560772.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2019/01/21/City-Lade-har-aldri-omsatt-for-mer-enn-i-2018-18274739.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/nyheter/trondelag/2020/01/21/Fotgjenger-p%C3%A5kj%C3%B8rt-p%C3%A5-Lade-20887266.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/nyheter/2019/03/21/Spaserte-ut-av-butikk-p%C3%A5-City-Lade-i-splitter-nye-joggesko-uten-%C3%A5-betale-18703188.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/01/31/Merethe-slutter-med-butikkdrift-p%C3%A5-City-Syd-etter-ti-%C3%A5r-20964311.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/nyheter/2020/03/14/Kj%C3%B8pesentrene-i-Trondheim-reduserer-%C3%A5pningstidene-21346795.ece
 * https://www.adressa.no/pluss/okonomi/2020/03/24/Butikkjede-konkurs-tre-butikker-legger-ned-i-Trondheim-21429343.ece
 * Now it's their turns for those who insist on no sources or no notability to prove why these dont count. And when they're done, they can go on to analyse the 2nd page of Google News results. And then the 3rd, 4th, 5th...
 * P.S. for those that like citing essays instead of reasoning and finding sources, here are two for them: WP:NEXIST Don't cite essays or proposals as if they were policy.--RZuo (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: I have one for you, RZuo - it's WP:BULLSHIT. Obviously you didn't look at the "sources" you threw up.  I just did.  The first two are single sentences. The third is a single sentence that doesn't mention the subject at all.  The fourth has a one-line quote from the mall manager.  The fifth is a single sentence that doesn't mention the subject at all.  The sixth is two sentences long.  The seventh is a single sentence that doesn't mention the subject at all.  And so on.  It is frankly insulting, and verging on bad faith, to throw up a heap of Google hits you didn't bother to verify and then to jeer about it.  I agree that the GNG has not been met, and this mall meets no other notability standard.   Ravenswing      16:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Ravenswing as to the sorry state of the sources provided above. Not to mention, they all seem to be from the same source anyway and therefore would only count as one for notability, but they are clearly WP:BULLSHIT anyway. So the article fails the GNG and should be deleted. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:19, 18 August 2020 (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.