Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nordmoll


 * 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. Procedural Keep. This nomination was done by a sockpuppet and even after 2 relistings, there are no votes supporting deletion so I've closed this discussion as Keep. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Nordmoll

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

WP:PROMO, not sufficient reliable sources provided in the article. Oliver Virk (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Shopping malls and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to note on this and one or two other of your recent nominations, an article having insufficient sources is not grounds for deletion. An article should be deleted if it is not notable; ie if significant coverage in reliable, independent sources doesn't exist.  You're expected to check whether they exist before nominating an article and your nominations don't seem to show that this has happened.  GoldenRing (talk) 13:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a large retail complex, the activities of which are covered in detail in various media. It has a large area. I changed the article a little and added new information. К.Артём.1 (talk) 13:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DatGuyTalkContribs 12:45, 9 September 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - the sources in the article are just about adequate to confirm notability. Thparkth (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.