Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pine Centre 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 delete. Sorry, but I can't find any guideline or practice thst says that regional shopping centres are inherently notable. Other people here are contesting the claim, too. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:23, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
=[[:Pine Centre Mall]]=
:{{la|Pine Centre Mall}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Pine Centre Mall}})
Article about a shopping mall, referenced only to its own self-published lease-information brochure for potential tenants and not to any evidence of reliable source coverage about it in media. As always, our notability standards for shopping malls do not extend an automatic inclusion freebie to every mall that exists in every town or city -- we only include malls that can be properly sourced as passing a specific notability criterion. Bearcat (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 20:22, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 20:22, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep A regional shopping center is an industry standard. Enclosed regional shopping centers are generally notable, and there is no reason to think this is an exception. Unscintillating (talk) 21:16, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
::Shopping malls are not exempted from having to pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH just because they happen to meet certain arbitrary standards of regionalness or industrystandardness — it's "source it properly" or bust, with exactly zero options located anywhere between those two endpoints. Bearcat (talk) 00:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:GNG and appears to violate WP:PROMO (or at least WP:ORGIND). See also WP:ORGSIG ("No company or organization is considered inherently notable"). Shelbystripes (talk) 17:11, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - lack of significant coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 01:32, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete IN our experience here, eshopping centers of this size have not usually been considered notable DGG ( talk ) 01:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.