Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Woodlands 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The result was Nomination Withdrawn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corpx (talk • contribs)

The Woodlands Mall

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Up for deletion based on the notion that malls, unlike high schools, are not inherently notable. Also, being "one of the largest" malls in a city does not give it any more notability than any other building that might be "one of the largest" of its kind in a given city Corpx 17:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. 40,300 ghits, but it doesn't cite anything and is a substub. If anyone and expand it and establish notability, weak keep.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 17:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rewrite made. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No valid assertion of notability Lurker  17:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Dalejenkins 17:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I rewrote the article, adding much more information. It's still a stub, but notability is now established. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 18:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree.  The size of a mall should not be criteria for inclusion.   This would mean any building above would be notable among the buildings in the same category.   Any police station bigger than __-sqft would be notable and any firehouse that houses more than __ firetrucks would be notable or any jail that has more than ___ cells would be notable.  I think the inclusion criteria for malls should be based more on History/ultimate size (biggest in the state/nation)/attractions and similiar factors. Corpx 19:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you may have put that comment in the wrong place. Personally, I agree with you, that malls of a certain size aren't inherently notable -- but I believe that the article now sufficiently states notability beyond square footage (e.g. first Vans store in Houston, children's museum, 1.4 mile waterway in outdoor section, etc. etc.). Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 19:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think the stores/officies a mall houses should be a reason to consider a mall notable.   However, I think having the waterway of that kind makes it unique and sets it apart from other malls.   Thanks for expanding the article.  I'll withdraw this nomination tomorrow, so anyone who wants to leave comments can do so.  Corpx 01:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I think the bar for auto-notability is super-regional, either way, TenPound's rewrite fits. Kwsn (Ni!) 18:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete: Most of the actual news coverage of the existence of the mall seems to be endless repetitions of press releases. Is there anything else to say?--Pleasantville 19:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Of course, neither malls nor high schools are intrinsically notable. To a certain extent notability of malls does correlate with size--the largest ones are likely to have the most public attention and consequently notable events & features and acceptable sources. This is over the bar. DGG 00:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with you; however, this is not one of the largest malls in the nation. Corpx 01:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think he's aware of that. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 02:02, 29 June 2007 (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.