Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Three Kings 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 speedy delete per G12 and A7. The incident which occurred in the mall (which appears notable) may be recreated quite easily under an article name appropriate to general usage, but a minor shopping centre really should be documented in the suburb within which it falls, or perhaps on the major road on which it falls. Orderinchaos 13:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Three Kings Shopping Mall

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:ORG and WP:N miserably. Jauerback 13:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Oli Filth 13:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no claim of notability whatsoever.--Victor falk 14:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm going to quote a comment from another AfD, while I don't entirely agree with every detail it contains important truths: "All malls should have articles here because they are the local landmarks of our times, often replacing Main Street or town squares. They have as much influence on towns as highways, schools, or stadiums. They are substantial economic enterprises and raise major issues involving land use, taxation, and globalization. Too many people love to talk, read or write about them for us to play silly games and try to exclude them. This may be hard for people to believe, but in the real world, they are far more important than the latest Virtual community, Pokemon card, or webcomic." Mathmo Talk 21:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions.   -- Mathmo Talk 21:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This (yet another New Zealand mall targeted for Afd) one doesn't seem to be notable for the area and unsourced.--JForget 01:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: As you said, this is "yet another New Zealand mall targeted for Afd". Sadly it does seem to be so that every single one of them is trying to be deleted right now...... which is drastically unfair, many are worthy of being saved. And this can be shown to be so if there was a chance given to put in the effort. But with so many many nominator, the time spent is spread very thinly. Would have been far far better if only one at a time had been nominated, then each could have had the discussion it deserves as to if it should be kept or not. Mathmo Talk 02:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per Mathmo.- gadfium 05:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletions.   —Thewinchester (talk) 12:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Not withstanding this centre is just way too small to justify an article and nothing can be found to support notability, the article is a direct copyvio. Article has been tagged with G12 for action. Thewinchester (talk) 13:37, 3 August 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.