Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Griffith Lifestyle Centre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Eluchil404 (talk) 05:54, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Griffith Lifestyle 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)
Non-notable shopping centre. According to Property Council Australia, a regional shopping centre is one which "typically incorporates one full line department store, a full line discount department store, one or more supermarkets and around 100 or more specialty shops." This centre fails to do so. 11coolguy12 (talk) 06:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete The article just claims it is "large" without giving the gross leasable area, commonly used to separate regional shopping centers from smaller ones. Could not find references giving the GLA. The article has links for some of the stores, but no reference for the centre itself, which might support notability per WP:ORG. Sghopping centers are not automatically notable just for existing. Edison (talk) 18:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. It's a large project, 10 or some main big retailers and lots of smaller retailers according to some google links. If it gets deleted, it will just be recreated in the short future. Not an up and coming case because its a shopping centre, not a person. Ray-Rays 19:26, 4 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond88824 (talk • contribs)
- The question is not if it will be recreated or not, it's a matter of passing the WP:GNG, which this centre fails to do so. 11coolguy12 (talk) 00:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Relisting comment: Beeblebrox (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Can't find discussion of it in reliable sources. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- weak Delete - seems odd that even the Local newspaper has never mentioned the place in their daily reporting. I can only guess that Griffith is a crimefree zone :P Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 04:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete due to complete lack of WP:RS. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:20, 16 November 2011 (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.