Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pentagon Centre


 * 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. A good discussion that, in the end, had no !votes to keep. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  20:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Pentagon Centre

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable shopping mall. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I feel this shopping center is notable enough since it is adjacent to a very well-known mall, Fashion Centre at Pentagon City, is featured in its article, and would not fit within the article for Fashion Centre. Regardless, most of the shopping centers listed under Template:DC Malls are not notable. --Old Guard (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * By the theory of "six degrees of separation", if everything next to something notable or mentioned in an article about something notable is considered inherently notable as a result, then everything would be notable. Then nothing would be. The argument that (something else) is an article and isn't notable is irrelevant, because if they aren't, then they're subject to deletion as well.—Largo Plazo (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * A mall is a mall is a mall... Would anyone care to dig through these sources to establish some special notability?   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 23:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I frequent these malls, and I can imagine that Pentagon Row, the other mall that I flagged at the same time as this one, might have garnered an award, as one of the newer livable smart-growth outdoor malls with consolidated residential space; I'll take a look. But this one? It's a nondescript building with a homely interior with a CostCo, a Marshall's, a Linens and Things, a Best Buy, a Borders, a Chevy's, and (surprise!) a Starbucks. No way there's anything remarkable about it.—Largo Plazo (talk) 23:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So you're saying you flagged Pentagon Row for deletion and will now investigate whether it's notable?--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 01:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Part of the dynamic of these discussions is that someone might make a point that someone else hadn't already considered. It hadn't occurred to me before to think of it in terms of having won an award. Originally I'd been thinking in terms of, "Gee, it has a Noodle & Company, a Baja Fresh, a Hallmark store, and a Harris Teeter. How does this distinguish it from 50,000 other shopping malls in this country alone?" In fact, the realization that there might be something I don't know about how shopping malls are judged de facto for notability purposes (not de jure&#8212;there is no operative notability policy specifically for shopping malls on Wikipedia at the moment), as well as leaving open the possibility that someone might make some points in favor of keeping the article, is why I didn't just request speedy deletion under WP:CSD. —Largo Plazo (talk) 01:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * But the article is not about "a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content", so WP:CSD wouldn't apply anyways.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * A shopping mall isn't an organzation (a company or a segment thereof)?—Largo Plazo (talk) 02:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's pretty clearly a building or structure.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 02:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * But despite that Delete this place doesn't meet the notability standard there either. The Pentagon Centre in Chatham,--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 03:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC) UK might though...
 * It isn't clear to me. Anyway, note that while the (proposed!) buildings article doesn't mention malls, it mentions two other kinds of places where consumers spend money, and in each of those cases it refers the reader to WP:CORP for the applicable criteria.—Largo Plazo (talk) 23:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * "in each of those cases it refers the reader to WP:CORP for the applicable criteria" That's only true for chains and we're talking about shopping malls, not chains of shopping malls.  In cases not related to chains it goes back to the same criteria as for other structures.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 00:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Funny, OK, I missed "chain". But then, a chain of hotels or restaurants isn't a building, structure, or landmark, so it's awfully strange that they bothered mentioning them at all. But it doesn't matter: if offered it as the consequence an *even if* the buildings criteria apply. I still don't think of a shopping mall as primarily a building. In fact, in the case of Skyline Mall (discussed in another AfD) it isn't *even* a building, and the same goes for the Crystal City Underground&#8212;obviously, since each is just part of a building. Finally, I note again that regardless of whether Wikipedia has yet to complete a policy on malls, what seems obvious to me is that if you can go by the local press, then every single shopping mall on the planet is notable. The whole point of notability criteria is to distinguish those things that are truly worth taking note of from the rest. Any definition of notability for some particular class of things that results in all members of the class being notable is a worthless definition.—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete no sources found. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 00:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions.   --  Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 00:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  TravellingCari  03:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment relisted on the grounds that while there's back and forth, there doesn't appear to be consensus. I think a few extra days could bring consensus, so not closing as a no-con. TravellingCari 03:51, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to agree entirely with the nominator on this one. The subject of this unsourced stub doesn't need an article. Delete Master&amp;Expert  ( Talk ) 04:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. See comments above. (I don't think anyone's taking the contrary position.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 19:00, 15 October 2008 (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.