Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vasundhara Metro 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 no consensus. After three weeks, there's no consensus regarding the retention, deletion, merging, etc. of this article. Regarding the merge !vote by User:Unscintillating, a discussion of such can continue on an article talk page. (Non-administrator closure.) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:11, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vasundhara Metro Mall

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

A shopping center in Patna like thousands of shopping centers in India which do not credibly indicate the importance or significance of it. The article was once PRODed and recent CSD was declined by non-admin editor[1]. The only reliable reference have a single passing mention which doesn't establish notability. Bisswajit 06:51, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Speedy was declined due to WP:CSD#A7, which is to be used only for individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events.--Shivam (U-T-C) 18:55, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shivam (U-T-C) 11:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Isn't a mall an organization? Epeefleche (talk) 01:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, a mall is a mall. It might also be interpreted as a building or a place, but those aren't CSD A7 criteria either. The removal of the A7 tag was completely correct in this case. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 07:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

We view a school as an organization. Why not a mall? Epeefleche (talk) 01:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While acknowledging that I think our usual practice towards secondary schools is completely bonkers, most of our "school" articles are not on the buildings, they're on the institutions that are inside the buildings. If this were an article on "Vasundhara Homes Pvt. Ltd", the company that owns this particular mall, then the article would be A7-able. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 08:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

No argument on our practices in the school area. :::::::But I actually think schools and malls are comparable in this regard. In each case, I don't think we are writing primarily on the physical building. With private schools for example, we are writing on what the organization that runs the service of education within the edifice happens to offer (sometimes it is what a private school company offers as "school x"; sometimes it is a board of education offering it as "school y"). And with malls we are doing the same. We are writing on what the organization that runs the edifice happens to offer within the edifice. I don't think in either case we are writing primarily on the bricks and mortar, though that would be the case with historically significant buildings. --Epeefleche (talk) 08:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And... I think the fact we can debate about this, apart from being off topic, is a prime reason why it's not appropriate for the blunt instrument of speedy deletion, which should only be for absolutely straightforward, clear cut cases. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 08:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. Shivam (U-T-C) 11:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge A look at Patna shows a picture of a mall, and the template at the bottom shows four malls. One of the current sources in the article discusses a list of malls in Patna. As per the policy WP:ATD, if this topic is determined to be non-notable, it can be merged to a new article, List of malls in Patna. Unscintillating (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Times of India article shows this to be the important mall in the city. In addition, per WP:OUTCOMES, a common outcome is that articles on malls are almost always considered notable.--Shivam (U-T-C) 18:55, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Outcomes says that this is true for "larger" malls. The only metric I've seen so far is that there is one anchor. Unscintillating (talk) 20:45, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I find it difficult to believe that a six-storied mall has only one anchor store; moreover, this mall is designed by the most renowned Architect of India, Hafeez Contractor, which is rare in case of malls (he is often considered as brand ambassador of the architecture of India [2]), is also a sign of notability.--Shivam (U-T-C) 17:39, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inherent notability doesn't apply here and the link[3] doesn't mention anything about "Vasundhara Metro Mall" either. Bisswajit 18:42, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that inherent notability does not apply here. And that the assertion that "articles on malls are almost always considered notable" is untrue.Epeefleche (talk) 08:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:09, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails to meet any of our notability criteria. Epeefleche (talk) 08:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the notability is established by the India Times article. American malls such as this this and this all have articles with similar sourcing. ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ Talk ♪} ߷ _{♀ Contribs ♀} 05:51, 24 May 2014 (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.