Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampton Towne Centre (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TenPoundHammer (talk | contribs) at 03:31, 22 November 2021 (fix). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hampton Towne Centre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence it was ever notable. The usual size when a mall is likely to have sources for notability is 1 million sq ft, but this mall had only one-third of that. Thus there are only local and first-party sourdces DGG ( talk ) 02:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article seems to have okay coverage and could probably be improved. 1 million sq ft seems an arbitrary cutoff and the arguments for coverage being WP:ROUTINE are shaky at best. Pokemonprime (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE isn't my argument. SL93 (talk) 00:09, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can anyone tell me what makes shopping malls so special compared to other local companies? No one has told me yet and I can't find the information. For example, I created an article on a local restaurant with similar coverage, but it was deleted in AfD as non-notable. Do people just love shopping that much? It's a serious question because I can't find anything. SL93 (talk) 00:16, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, great, but I doubt that such local coverage would fly for any other company. I still see nothing beyond a personal opinion that shopping malls are superior to companies with similar coverage and discussion. SL93 (talk) 00:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dozens of AFDs closed as "keep" for the same level of coverage are a "personal opinion" to you, huh? Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 00:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - with no notability guideline, a failed notability proposal, and a contradictory outcomes page. SL93 (talk) 00:28, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's try it another way. How is another company, with similar coverage, insignificant compared to shopping malls? SL93 (talk) 00:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's a question ultimately beyond the scope of this AFD. I'd say that it ultimately comes down to what the company is, and there seems to be some back and forth about this almost every time a mall gets nominated for deletion, but in the end, far more AFDs than not tend to lean "keep". I think by now it's best for both of us to just WP:STICK and let the AFD run its course. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 00:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I really am concerned for Wikipedia in general that I can't get a good answer for the above question based on there being apparent common outcomes. I think that the outcomes page is questionable in general - "Books are notable (and thus kept) if well-known, and should be listed under the author if not." So yeah, well-known, but significant coverage isn't mentioned - never in my years of book AfDs have I seen this outcome. I will let the AfD run its course, unless someone lies about my rationale again. SL93 (talk) 00:44, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TenPoundHammer's answer makes sense. Malls are different than most businesses in terms of scale. A comparison that makes sense is probably skyscrapers. They're of a scale that many of them are indeed notable. e.g. Millennium Tower (San Francisco)
However... this particular mall does not seem to be notable enough for inclusion just like your run of the mill skyscraper, which isn't special in any particular way, doesn't deserve an article. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment A shopping mall can be a major permanent (or semi-permanent) community facility. I've supported articles on many. I don't think the sources show that this one ever was. (It is one of those subject where it is particularly difficult to distinguish substantial sources from advertising, which can cause difficulties). DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do think that the sources added by User:Sammi Brie show further notability in how the mall was an early adopter of an innovation by Kmart, as well as an impact on downtown. This, combined with the murder at the Lerner store and the substantial coverage it got on purchase, should push it over the notability line (especially since it has spent most of the Internet era as a dead mall). This discussion seems like it's headed to a "no consensus" at worst, given the back and forth that has gone on way too long above. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 03:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll note the reason I haven't !voted is that this is a toughie. If this were in another metro area with a long-run newspaper in newspapers.com, I'd be a lot better off. Most of Michigan does not fall under that category (none of the Advance papers are represented in the modern era). I just have NewsBank, and not enough of it to cover the decline of this center. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 19:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]