Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summit Birmingham

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 Keep. Phaedriel - 23:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summit Birmingham[edit]

Vaguely spammy article on a lifestyle center in Alabama. Mentions the developer way too much, reads like an advertisement. Even if cleaned up, the mall would still fail WP:RS. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 19:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. Captain panda 21:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Summit (which is how it should be titled, not "Summit Birmingham") is the second-largest shopping center in metro Birmingham behind Riverchase Galleria. It was one of the first — some say the first, and I'm looking for a source to prove or disprove that — of the open-air lifestyle centers that are now the popular mode for shopping centers, supplanting enclosed malls. The article does need sources, which [http:ww.al.com AL.com] should easily provide. I think the "vaguely spammy" claim is off target. I'm sending this article to the Intensive Care Unit. Realkyhick 17:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added more material, including a lawsuit against the center's largest tenant, and several references. Realkyhick 18:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tikiwont 11:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable commerce center and tourist attraction in a major city. Realkyhick has improved the article considerably. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to The Summit (lifestyle center) or something of that effect. It's a notable landmark in Birmingham. Smashville 13:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Starblind Optimale ^Gu 13:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I believe Realkyhick's edits refute the original argument for deletion and show the article's notability Helmsb 14:54, 14 September 2007 (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.