Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avenue West Cobb

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. MBisanz ^talk 06:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Avenue West Cobb[edit]

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

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

Neither of these seem to be notable shopping malls. The only sources I found were press releases on the opening of new stores at each strip. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 13:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 13:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not notable. Press releases only. Richard Pinch (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a number of on-topic sources are available, including [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5]. (There were more at Google News but I'm on deadline for a project so my time here is short.) Yes, sources should be integrated into the article but they are available so the notability threshold can be crossed. - Dravecky (talk) 15:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep I dislike seeing articles about shoping malls, as I feel that simply being a set of shops is not notable... but these sources seem have it to pass WP:GNG: [6][7][8][9][10]. Sigh. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete, doesn't seem to be notable. And in part due to no reliable refs. Gateman1997 (talk) 22:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply The reliable refs are available, see my and Schmidt's comments above, and availability is all that is required for AfD. Yes, they should be integrated and used to expand the article and that will happen as soon as I can complete another project but notability and verifiability are easily established here. - Dravecky (talk) 08:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The AJC covers pretty much all commercial developments in Atlanta, and several of the others seem to be poor attempts at journalism that are basically regurgitated press releases, if not simply actual press releases; I'm not convinced that these satisfy WP:GNG. Qqqqqq (talk) 05:39, 12 October 2008 (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.