Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midtown 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. czar 02:09, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Midtown Shopping mall

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I've just declined a G11 speedy deletion nomination on the grounds that the article isn't blatantly promotional. Listing here for further review. It's a shopping center in Turkey, quick Google search doesn't confirm notability but maybe just not in English? –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 14:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment As per http://www.icsc.org/uploads/research/general/US_CENTER_CLASSIFICATION.pdf, which is for the US, a mall with GLA of 400,000–800,000 sq ft is a Regional Mall, of which there are 600 in the US, or in the largest 1220 malls in the US.  This mall is reportedly 43,800 m2, or 470,000 sq ft, which puts it in the class of a regional mall.  Unscintillating (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Run of the WP:MILL shopping mall. Ajf773 (talk) 09:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * delete unsourced. And no corresponding Turkish article.  LibStar (talk) 10:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * To be fair, those aren't really the most persuasive arguments for deletion. There's no requirement for interwiki links, and if we deleted all unsourced articles, the servers would be a lot lighter. Did you attempt to look for sources even if they aren't in the article? While I agree deletion is probably the inevitable outcome here, I'd like to make sure it's the right one. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * it could have been prodded even you have said you can't find decent coverage . LibStar (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2017 (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.