Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boone 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Boone Mall

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Two of the three sources are news about the mall flooding and don't count per WP:NOTNEWS. That leaves one article which only contains one short paragraph about the mall. I found one halfway decent source saying the mall was renovated, but could not find any other sources. Fails WP:GNG. Me5000 (talk) 01:26, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think that the article should. There are plenty of other mall related pages that are worse than this one. --ACase0000 (talk) 04:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The subject-specific notability guideline applicable here is WP:ORG. Google News finds some sources, but the overwhelming majority is local coverage intended for a local audience (lots in the High Country Press), thus not satisfying WP:AUD. Even coverage about the flooding is all exclusively local [1][2]. There does appear to be any national level coverage that would separate this mall from all the other malls in the world—see WP:MILL. As for the other mall-related pages that may be worse, I don't find that a very convincing reason to keep this one, as many articles exist on Wikipedia that probably shouldn't—see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Mz7 (talk) 04:38, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:OSE isn't a valid rationale for keeping a bad article. Mz7 and the nom give the best summaries of why this article should be deleted. Nothing in the engines showed anything which would make this mall notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.