Talk:CrossIron Mills

Rewrite to avoid a promotional flavour

I tagged it because of its "promotional" flavour—at the moment it sounds like a prospectus prepared by the real estate developer. It needs to be rewritten so that it is NPOV, all statements are sourced, and the tone is encyclopedic—then of course it can stay. Hurdle to be mastered: finding verifiable sources for any assertions made that do not simply amount to taking the word of the backers of the project on faith.

At present it sounds like advertising because the statements about what features it "will" have are not (yet) verifiable facts, but simply someone's promises. These "not yet facts" need to be rephrased along the lines of: "According to statements by XYZ Corp. and ABC Regional Economic Development Commission, the backers of the project, the mall will have …" Statements like this are verifiable; one just needs to cite mainstream media (typically a reputable newspaper—promotional materials or company websites are not enough) showing that spokespersons for XYZ and ABC did in fact make such public statements.

Since you say you'll fix it, I'll remove the speedy-delete tag and replacing it with "sounds like advertising" tag pending rework. --IslandGyrl 19:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Added New Sections

I have added a Controversy section (not really promotional) as well external links to an article on Canada.com (which i hope would be a reliable resource).--Gaeriel 20:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

This is my first article so i better ask this before i get in trouble. I found an artists rendering on what this mall might look like on their main website, however, there is no licence or copyright on this image that i could find in the terms & conditions or their privacy policy. I sent them an e-mail, but other than that, what else should i do?

Removal

I am going to remove the {Advertising} tag on this page. I re-worked it as to not sound like a rep is advertising this project. More information has been added for neutrality.--Gaeriel 17:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

CrossIron Mills

It appears that the official name of the mall will be "CrossIron Mills" according to Ivanhoe Cambridge. I am not very familiar with Wikipedia editing so I think I will leave it to someone else to perform such a large edit.

Screwed up Royally, sorry

I created an article titled 'Crossiron mills' without seeing this article, otherwise I would have just 'moved' it. But I'm not that great with WIKI so I screwed it up. Noticing the lack of capitalization I moved that article to 'CrossIron Mills'. Fine. then I found this article. So now this article redirects to Crossiron Mills. But CrossIron Mills brings you to my new article. Can someone much much smarter than me fix this? Last time I try to create and redirect articles. Damn.

Trying to Fix

Wow, this is a dittly of a pickel. What i have done is add all the new information from your article and put it into this one. We will keep one of the articles and then redirect yours the the new revampt one. I will leave it to you to change the article that you have started. Sound good? P.S. Make sure to leave your signature in the discussion so we know who said what :) --Gaeriel 15:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Much Better

Thanks, looks like its been sorted out. Really appreciate the help. Will fix up the article.--68.147.194.28 02:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

First real mall since 1990

I did a little checking, and as near as I can tell, if one doesn't count cases where malls have been reconstructed (i.e. Franklin Mall becoming Pacific Place Mall, and Dragon City in Chinatown was reconstructed from a previous development), Crossiron will be the first enclosed mall built in the Calgary region since Calgary Eaton Centre. I've added this to the article, however if anyone can cite a shopping mall newer than 1990, please do so. Given how much Calgary has become "power centre" happy in the last decade -- Crowfoot, Deerfoot Meadows and Shawnessy would have been major Chinook/Southcentre-style malls had they been developed 30 years ago -- I think this is a fact that is notable and worth including in this article. 68.146.47.196 20:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

2008 opening?

Is this still correct? I drove by the site only a few days ago and it's not even a hole in the ground; real construction hasn't even started yet. Is the mall still expected to be up and running next year? I would expect 2009 to be a more realistic target. 68.146.41.232 16:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• There's no way the mall will be done this year. I have added a citation needed tag because of a 2008 opening is still being claimed, there should be a source given; alternately, if the opening date is being pushed back, this should be updated. 23skidoo (talk) 01:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Ivanhoe Cambridge lists August 2009 as the targetted opening date now. I've updated the article to reflect this. Resolute 18:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
    • And I'll update the infobox, too. Even 2009 looks to be a bit optimistic based upon how much has been completed to date. 23skidoo (talk) 14:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Dead links

The two site plan PDF links are no longer active and it appears all IC has on their site now is a brief description of the project. Does anyone know if these PDFs have been archived anywhere? 68.146.41.232 (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Updates and revisions

I've made a few updates and changes as the opening date (now a done deal) approaches. The UHA racetrack is not "on hold" as an earlier revision stated, though it's got money problems delaying its completion; I added a Calgary Herald article citation. Also, when the mall does open, the list of stores included in this article should be vetted against what actually opens in the mall. The official website actually has a full store list already, but I'd still suggest waiting till the mall actually opens in case any of the chains vanish between now and then. Also, I'm starting to hear the name "Mallzac" being used here and there as a nickname. It's too early to include this in the article as it's an obvious neologism right now, but if the nickname picks up cachet it'll be worth noting. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 00:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible controversy aspect to watch

It's too early to add this to the story right now, but reading some of the reader comments in the Herald, and elsewhere, there seems to be the potential for controversy over issues such as "carbon footprint" with the mall (even though you'd think a power centre that forces people to drive between stores would generate more; think about it). Not that i expect to see pickets out there or anything, but once the mall opens and the reaction starts to be noted in the media, it might be worth keeping an eye on. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 13:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Article title

This article should be moved to CrossIron Mills (with capital I) because that's the correct spelling of the mall. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Though it is no secret what I think of manuals of style, I agree with moving it to CrossIron Mills. Even the provincal government, via the signs over the highway, calls it CrossIron. That would IMO make it a proper name and not a "styled as" . delirious & lost ☯ ^~нuɢѕ~ 13:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move done as requested, there's consensus with good evidence provided. Fences&Windows 13:12, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Crossiron Mills → CrossIron Mills — As you can see from its official web site, and per at least three discussion sections above, the official name of this mall is CrossIron Mills, not Crossiron Mills. Albeit the capitalization is unconventional, this article should reflect the mall's official name. Hwy43 (talk) 07:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment the proposed name may be in violation of MOS:TM. But I'm not an expert on it, I know there are a lot of exceptions. 117Avenue (talk) 07:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Re comment: If you look at the MOS:TM you will see an "escape clause" as such.

• Trademarks in CamelCase are a judgment call. CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable:

• OxyContin or Oxycontin—editor's choice

So it really is up to those who work on the article to decide. This is one instance where an MOS on WP allows for discretion. delirious & lost ☯ ^{~talk to her~} 22:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It's only editor's choice if it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable. Is there any evidence that it reflects general usage in this case? Andrewa (talk) 11:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The Calgary Herald seems to think so. [1] [2] As does the Calgary Sun. [3] [4] [5] Likewise CTV Calgary. [6] [7] Dito for Canadian Business [8], Montreal's The Gazette [9], CBC [10], Daily Commercial News [11], and the Edmonton Journal too. [12] [13] Even Bloomberg L.P. has the caps "I". [14] Then there is this article from the Calgary Herald which uses lowercase in the article title but uses a caps "I" in the article itself :P [15] I not going to list every gnews result but by far the useage, be it in news about the mall, about something that happened near the mall, or in advertising new housing developments as being near the mall, is CrossIron Mills mall. I would think that constitutes general usage. delirious & lost ☯ ^{~talk to her~} 20:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

• Move Most often the article itself uses CrossIron but the article title has been Crossiron. As i noted above it is optional. With the lowercase it could be read as Cross Iron Mills, or Crossi Ron Mills, or Cross I R On Mills, or C Ross Iron Mills, or C Ross I Ron Mills. I admit that most of those are pretty silly but they are legitimate divisions of the name given the lack of case distinction. If someone really needs it i could see about going and getting a picture of the nice green sign over highway 2 wherein the government recognises it as CrossIron Mills. The ones i have are much to blurry to be of reference. You can see a corner of the highway sign in this pic but more to the point it shows the huge sign for the mall along the highway. [16] delirious & lost ☯ ^{~talk to her~} 22:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

From the looks of the photo it is all uppercase, which I do know is a no no. 117Avenue (talk) 23:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Notwithstanding the sign in the logo has all letters in upper case (similar to the mall's logo on its official web site), the "C" and the "I" are emphasized with a larger font size as if they were upper case to an all upper case stylized font face. The font face used in the sign is likely about branding.

In exploring the official web site further, the text in the various individual pages uses upper case only for the "C" and the "I" and lower case for the balance of the word. (E.g., "Whether you need sporting goods for the hockey season, toys for the kids or a new wardrobe for yourself, CrossIron Mills is sure to please.") --Hwy43 (talk) 03:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, I haven't seen incorrect capitalization in an official road name before. After checking the official map[17], and signage[18], which were both all uppercase, I can't deduce what the county would consider the official address to be. But after seeing the lower case version on the mall's website, in the text locals added to the article, and on the county's website [19](the text not the header), I support the rename. 117Avenue (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Controversy section

I removed the entire controversy section. Given that nobody has been able to find citations since these were requested back in, and I'm not kidding, August 2011, it seemed that the article was giving undue weight to the section. I don't live in Airdrie or Calgary and have never been to this mall. If someone can find citations for the controversy, it can certainly be restored. --Yamla (talk) 13:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Mills-type mall?

The following sentence appears in the intro paragraph: "It's the first Mills-type mall to be opened since Pittsburgh Mills in 2005 and the 2007 demise of the predecessor, the Mills Corporation." There's no indication what a "Mills-type mall" is, and it's not clear from context. Could someone clarify or reword this, please? --Yamla (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Resolved. Removed as part of copyvio investigation. --Yamla (talk) 18:34, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on CrossIron Mills. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110809184552/http://www.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/ConceptPlan-render-08-30-06-FLT.pdf to http://www2.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/ConceptPlan-render-08-30-06-FLT.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100214003344/http://www2.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/alberta_main_lrg.jpg to http://www2.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/alberta_main_lrg.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100214003350/http://www2.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/alberta_mall_lrg.jpg to http://www2.icleasing.ca/Properties/alberta_project/documents/alberta_mall_lrg.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080430034156/http://www2.icleasing.ca/En/AlbertaPhotos.aspx to http://www2.icleasing.ca/En/AlbertaPhotos.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)