Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grant Park Shopping Centre


 * 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. Overall, the arguments for keeping this article are much stronger than the argument to delete. ‑Scottywong | verbalize _ 00:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Grant Park Shopping Centre

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Procedural nomination for an IP: rationale: "as tags on the article page says, that this shopping centre is wholly not notable and the article appears to be a shameless advertisement for the mall and the shops within it. If it were to be considered notable, then there are four shopping centres in my own town that are equally (un)notable and would be equally (un)deserving of their own articles. Not to mention a few tens of thousands of equally undeserving centres on the planet as a whole." J04n(talk page) 12:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: You were quick off the mark with that and missed my slight rewrite of the criteria. I slightly rephrased the criteria to, "... that this shopping centre is wholly not notable and that I believe that the article appears to be a shameless advertisement for the mall and the shops within it."   86.157.171.171 (talk) 13:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. The subject is a notable mall in Winnipeg and warrants an article. The fact that other shopping centres do not have articles is not particularly relevant to the issue, as Wikipedia does not have articles that it should. While I agree that the article does seem slightly promotional, that is not the sole purpose of the article. I have removed a few POV statements to make it read less like an advertisement. There is no doubt a lot of work to be done on this article, but the quality of the article has little to do with the subject's notability. -- qwekiop147 →  talk  23:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Why is it a notable mall? You should explain under what criteria you are asserting notability, and provide evidence. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The subject of this article is a major mall in Winnipeg. While there are not many relevant web results, there are quite a few news results. It has received significant and reliable coverage in the news and no original research is required to create this article. It has several major tenants, which are listed at the article to provide information, not just to promote the mall. It is also significant to the areas of River Heights, Crescentwood, Riverview, and Tuxedo, because many people from those neighbourhoods shop there. This article is not purely promotional and so I disagree that it was created just to promote the mall. While this article does have some issues, they can certainly be fixed. -- qwekiop147 →  talk  22:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. the page is created to promote the shopping center. Wikipedia is not the stage for business promotion. the page should be deleted Jussychoulex (talk) 13:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 10:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)




 * Keep - In additonj ot the sources in the article, I found this and this which are stories which feature the mall as the primary subject of the article. I also found this article which is about a store int he mall, and it's movement in the mall.  Not a primary subject, but still coverage.  I may have missed some potential source trying to weed my may through run of the mill news coverage of robberies and promotinal events, but I ams satisified that this coverage is suffficient to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Still don't see why this mall deserves an article when there are a few thousand others that don't have articles. MezzoMezzo (talk) 10:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete A run of the mill mall with insufficient claim to fame to make it notable.--Charles (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2013 (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.