Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italia Mura


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Italia Mura

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Little to no hits via quick search on Google. Sarrail (talk) 22:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Shopping malls and Japan.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree it does not meet notability requirements. KeepItGoingForward (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: While the English article doesn't show the notability of the topic, the Japanese article has at least four references to articles about the topic in various newspapers. I haven't had a chance to look at the other refs more closely, but there may be other refs that can be used, too. I'll see what I can do to add them in the next few days. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 23:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Ha ha-Okay, there's plenty of time. Sarrail  (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Abstain Delete I also looked at the ja.wiki article, which has eight sources. However 4-8 cover the section “post-closure situation”. Only 1-3 are about the mall itself. 1 is a dead link but appears to have been to the winding up order closing the mall; 2 is from an online news source, again covering the windup and summarising the mall’s history, and 3 is from the same news source covering the inventory sale after it closed. That’s nowhere near GNG so unless there are other Japanese sources I think deletion is appropriate. Mccapra (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've expanded it, incorporating some of the jawiki article refs (not all the refs there could be used) as well as a New York Times article and another English article about the place. With these two new sources, and the Japanese sources about various aspects of its closure, I think it meets WP:GNG. I also added two images and an infobox to the article. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 21:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * due to the updates on the article. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 02:40, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Most sources seem to be around its bankruptcy. What in your view makes Italia Mura notable? It definitely is an interesting idea. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 20:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, but some of those (including the New York Times article) discuss its actual operations. All of the sources I used are more than passing mentions of the complex, and given how many sources there are, I think it now meets WP:GNG. It certainly didn't before all those changes, but I think the improvements show its notability. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 22:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, some of them talk about the construction fraud as well, which has nothing (directly) to do with the bankruptcy. With references discussing its opening, operations, bankruptcy, construction fraud, and even usage of the site after the closure (two different uses), it's more than just one event being covered. It shows that the topic of the article was discussed in detail multiple times by multiple reliable sources, therefore meeting WP:GNG. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 22:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You have done nice work with the article's expansion and I do see a small case for notability, but I also don't see any specific sources that are extensively about Italia Mura. For instance the New York time article is about "offering an idealized distillation of a foreign culture" and not specifically about Italia Mura. The Japanese sources appear to be quick news releases/articles. May be it is worth asking an admin that reads Japanese to review the sources and the AFD? KeepItGoingForward (talk) 22:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I recognize that it's difficult to determine notability in other languages and cultures, a problem that is only compounded by the time frame and the, let's say, not exactly archive-friendly practices of the Japanese press that make anything before around 2007 in Japanese difficult to find with Google searches. Personally I think that Nihonjoe's work already shows that the topic is notable, and that the various objections raised based on the why and how of the coverage seem to fall under WP:NNC and should be handled per WP:DUE as an editing matter. But I would also add that it's simply not plausible that this lacked coverage around the time of its opening. For example, it showed up in the 2005 Nagoya episode of Adomachi (a long-running information/variety show that goes to cities/neighborhoods and has celebrities and such pitch their favorite things about the city, which are then ranked for entertainment purposes). I think the "possibility or existence of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article", which we are instructed to consider under our fundamental notability guideline, is high, so I come down on the keep side of things. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "fundamental notability guideline" and well the possibility may exist for notability-indicating sources, possibilities do not demonstrate notability, so I struggle with using that as a reason to keep an article. The episode may demonstrate notability if the whole (or most of it) episode was dedicated to Italia Mura. Was it? KeepItGoingForward (talk) 06:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keepper WP:HEY, following the recent expansion the current sourcing is IMO way enough for a claim of notability. Cavarrone 11:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per WP:HEY. The sources now in the article show notability enough for WP:GNG, even if some of them are focused on the bankruptcy aspect. - Aoidh (talk) 21:15, 17 December 2022 (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.