Talk:Deadmalls.com
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deadmalls.com article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Not speediable
editLet's take another look at CSD A7--this article asserts importance quite clearly, so it is not speedy material. I can assure you I am aware of the criteria for speedy deletion since I go around deleting stuff all day. If you want to take this up at AfD, go ahead. Irongargoyle 01:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're right. My mistake. I've removed the tag. Fan-1967 01:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, it DOES need to be removed, as references from this site are NOT credible according to jerkoffs like you two claiming so. That means you either need to remove this "non-credible" site off wikipedia, or quit saying info on their site is non-credible. You CAN'T have your cake and eat it too!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.36.7 (talk • contribs)
- It is entirely possible for a website to be considered notable, but where the information contained on it is not suitable for use as a reliable source on Wikipedia. The two are completely separate concepts and should not be confused. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, it DOES need to be removed, as references from this site are NOT credible according to jerkoffs like you two claiming so. That means you either need to remove this "non-credible" site off wikipedia, or quit saying info on their site is non-credible. You CAN'T have your cake and eat it too!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.36.7 (talk • contribs)
Notability?
editWhile Irongargoyle is quite right that the article doesn't meet A7, I'm not clear on how it is notable. Both source mentions are "in passing" (though I'll take a scan through the NPR piece to see if it details the site some more.) Even that wouldn't be multiple non-trivial mentions, however, and the first source is a "mention in passing"-unquestionably trivial. Seraphimblade 01:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- I posted another reference and removed the tag. I agree that the Kansas City Star reference is in passing, but not the NPR reference. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reference is definitely not in passing either. This should now pass WP:WEB. Best, Irongargoyle 01:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- The Post-Gazette is quite in-depth, and it sounds like the full NPR story is as well. Seraphimblade 01:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Deadwebsites.com
editWhat else is there to be said? Deadmalls.com is a dead website. It sports the same gloom of better-days-gone-by as the malls they "highlight". Most of the information they post has dates on it from the mid-oughts.
The subject's notability was marginal from the start, but now it's just over and done.