Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of dead and distressed shopping malls


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 01:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

List of dead and distressed shopping malls

 * Keep While I agree it is simply a list, many of the articles I have found have pages for lists such as this one. Also, the two malls I added to this list in the Tampa, Florida Area have signifigance: The first one, Floriland Mall, is now the home of Hillsborough County Traffic Court. The second, East Lake Square, is one of only a handful of malls in the world that is more commercially succesful in its current form (Netp@rk Tampa) than as a shopping center.


 * Delete this article is simply a list.  It seems to have no purpose and does not seem to be an article befitting an encyclopedia. Strothra 21:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete although it's an interesting concept - can we start it with a list of blue links and one by one watch them go red?    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  22:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it is a work in progress, let it have some time to develop. Shopping malls are used by thousands to millions of people and are central to many towns, this is a way of organizing them. dml 00:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's a useful reference. Just because malls are defunct doesn't mean articles won't be written for their historical interest. Sulfur 02:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete What an utterly stupid concept for an article. Bad enough that malls are cookie-cutter places, even worse that dead malls have no relevance at all to the people in a community. (Of course this did not stop me from adding my own former favorite, now dead mall to the list. Still, I would not have wanted an article on it, generic as it was.) D e nni &#9775;  04:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. We already have Category:Defunct shopping malls. --Metropolitan90 04:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Not all of these malls are defunct, so the defunct malls category isn't a good fit. Some malls listed are in decline, but still operating nonetheless.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - A lot of categories have accompanying lists. Sulfur 05:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, not encyclopedic. &mdash;ERcheck @ 05:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as useful reference. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, more useful than Category:Defunct shopping malls because it says where they were and what happened to them. Kappa 13:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Dead shopping malls are an important part of American consumer culture. One dead shopping mall really close to me is listed on there.  Cyde Weys  18:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - They are hardly an important part of American consumer culture. A abandoned mall is either a nostalgic memory for some or tax-eating real-estate for others.  The story behind why a particular mall has been abandoned in a given community is far more important and telling to local history than the mall itself.  Thus abandoned malls may be considered important part of local consumer culture but not national or even international culture.  Further, the term "dead" should be replaced.  Mall are not living beings and therefore cannot die. --Strothra 13:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand to include shopping centres outside North America, but excluding malls that aren't notable in any significant way. Andrew 22:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * *audible blink* what an odd article title. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 01:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Kappa. BryanG 04:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't this treading dangerously close to POV and WP:OR? Seems to me that this has a high potential for abuse and a relatively low potential for verification, since anybody who watchlists it can really only verify the deadness-or-not of malls they personally know. Seems like a delete to me. Bearcat 23:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Not necessarily. The original list was compiled from Deadmalls.com, and pages about those malls have articles, and so there is some documentation about such things, making it less than original research in some cases.  Beyond where there is documentation, however, becomes questionable.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. Hard to verify, we need some hard and fast criteria and perhaps a new title. Kirjtc2 05:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but I would recommend revamping the article - removing distressed, possibly - and sticking with the dead malls. The mall is an important part of American Culture that is currently going by the wayside so this is a genuine article. SportingFlyer 00:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep though the mall pages need to be cleaned up more.
 * Keep but would recommend removing distressed. Nigelthefish 15:25, 1 March 2006 (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.