Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manukau Supa Centa (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 13:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Manukau Supa Centa
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Has been nominated before with no consensus (one keep but not overly convincing). Nominating for same reasons as with 36 run of the mill stores and barely any secondary sources, fails WP:GNG Ajf773 (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, appears to be a significant shopping centre, and although the number of shops is quite low (compared to the nearby Westfield Manukau City, it has comparable retail floor area because the shops are mostly very large (by New Zealand standards). I've added a little to the article.- gadfium 21:56, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  14:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, as it's one of the larger shopping centres. Also, "run of the mill stores" is not a reason for deletion; which NZ shopping centre isn't made up of run of the mill stores?  Schwede 66  08:22, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. The "keep" opinions do not cite any coverage as required by GNG. "Is a big shopping centre" is not an accepted criterion for inclusion.  Sandstein   15:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete GEOFEAT requires sources; I've searched high and low and have been unsuccessful in finding any sources (except one news report that has a one line mention, and three government sources with two line mentions). Lourdes  19:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Suitable sources for big commercial entities are best found in the National Business Review. Here's two articles not yet included (with the first referring to the change in ownership back in 2008): and  Unfortunately, their newer stuff is hidden behind a paywall.  Schwede  66  23:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks . This is a good source but has only a one-line mention. I also found three sources with one line mentions. GEOFEAT requires GNG to be met, and I don't believe one line sources are enough. If I am mistaken in my reading of GEOFEAT please do point out and I'll change my !vote. Thanks. Lourdes  03:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your understanding is the same as mine. All I'm saying is that the NBR has likely got sources that will meet the requirements, but somebody will have to have a subscription to confirm that.  Schwede 66  04:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll check from my library sources if I can get access to the same. Give me a couple of days (please don't close this Afd till 12 December). If I don't respond by then, assume I haven't been successful. If I do, I'll post the sources I've been able to garner. Thanks. Lourdes  04:34, 9 December 2016 (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.