Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plaza Tasek


 * 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. Notability not established, and no consensus in favor of keeping it on the presumption of notability at this time. Find sources and we'll talk. postdlf (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Plaza Tasek

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable business/location. Promotional wording. Author contested prod. OSbornarfcontribs. 17:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, spammy nn  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  19:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Non-notable mall; I couldn't find any reliable 3rd-party sources that provide significant coverage of the subject. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Neutral but I'm inclined to think a 5-storey mall would be notable in most parts of the world, and that sources probably do exist if only in Malaysian papers. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  20:27, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions.  --  JN  466  21:25, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions.  --  JN  466  21:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Though readily available sourcing is limited, there are indications this is sufficiently notable for inclusion. If anyone has free online access to archives of Malay Mail, etc., that might help.--Milowent • talkblp-r  03:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 00:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.