Talk:Shopping mall/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Shopping mall. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Retructuring and editing, recently completed

Latest comment: 4 years ago22 comments5 people in discussion

Hello all, I see that there is a lot of interest in this article but it's perhaps been too daunting for people to restructure it and edit it. I thought I would share what I have done – I have been WP:BOLD – and provide a forum for suggestions and consensus here:

I see this article as the basis for shopping centers in general – a mall being a type of shopping center. I hope that if this article is moved to Shopping centre or Shopping center, I hope to create a separate article with detailed information about the American-style, usually enclosed, shopping mall. That is where all the more detailed information on Dead malls, decline of this style of mall, etc., could go, thus making the Shopping center article shorter, i.e. a more reasonable size.
I changed the lede from a bit of a mixed bag to one that establishes WHAT it is the article is about, that is, shopping centers in general, including malls, retail parks/retail power centers/neighborhood centers, strip malls, festival marketplaces, and even two types where the search term in my opinion incorrectly leads to this article: shopping precincts (a pedestrianized "high street") and shopping arcades (the old-fashioned, urban, covered-in-glass type). Since that material already makes the lede quite lengthy, I refrained from trying to summarize key points of the article in the lede, even though that is best practice. I hope we can accomplish this later on.
I moved the "regional differences" to lower down in the article, since in the lede we have now addressed the chief reason this was so high up: the terminology differences between types of malls and US/UK usage. Therefore, this rather extensive material was more of a detail, i.e. how are shopping centers different around the world, US vs Canada vs UK vs Australia (and someone had thrown Russia in there) - hopefully later we can add more material about Asia, as half the world's population lives there and malls are extremely popular.
I brought the "types of shopping centers" section to the top right after the lede, because this is critical to understanding WHAT we are actually talking about in the article, i.e. the article covers malls, neighborhood centers, retail parks, strip malls, arcades, shopping precincts etc. - a diverse set. I added shopping arcade to this section of "Types".
(June 29, new): Changed the lede to bring in elements of the article's discussion of terminology (what a "Mall" is), the types of shopping centers in the U.S., Canada and U.K., and the history (origins as covered markets and covered passages or shopping arcades).

Any comments or suggestions?Keizers (talk) 15:04, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I just closed the move as "no consensus". I think your suggestion is excellent. Red Slash 18:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

OK Red Slash, I will create a new article about shopping centers using most of this material and retain what is relevant here for shopping malls only. Shame, because the history of the talk page will be effectively disjointed.Keizers (talk) 01:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Red Slash, hmmm I tried to do that (create a new shopping center article with the general content and a retain mall-specific content in shopping mall) and both changes were just rolled back. What do you suggest I do?Keizers (talk) 14:39, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

It may help if the rollbacker (@Flyer22 Frozen) can be engaged in some discussion to determine the reasoning applied. —ADavidB 14:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, seems to be a bot. I rolled back the rollback and asked them to participate in the discussion on this page before rolling back again. That seems reasonable to me(?)Keizers (talk) 14:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

It looked to me like you were being disruptive. For example, we don't have both a Pants and a Trousers article. We cover that in one article because it's the same topic. To have two different articles on the same topic would be a WP:POVFORK, and it's not at all helpful to readers. Per WP:Split, WP:Spinout and WP:No page, we also don't unnecessarily create spin-off articles. Often, subtopics can be covered in one article without needing their own article. When I saw you via WP:Huggle, I clicked on your contributions and also saw that you were blocked, and I thought you were indefinitely blocked. So I figured that I would revert and let others figure out what you were doing. But it turns out that you are only partially indefinitely blocked.

Anyway, looks like unnecessary splitting is going on. No need to ping me when you reply. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Dude, as I asked you to please read the discussions above. So even in replying here it's clear you didn't read them. There is splitting because these are two topics. A shopping center is not the same thing as a mall. A mall is one of many types of shopping centers. Also, be more careful when judging people for being blocked. I was blocked from one article.Keizers (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Not a dude. And I read them (your above rationale). Do whatever you want. I don't intend to get involved in this any further. As for "Also, be more careful when judging people for being blocked."? I was under the impression that you had just been indefinitely blocked, and I do mean completely indefinitely blocked, which would mean that you wouldn't be around to continue doing what you were doing. I didn't see a reason that we should be stuck with your edits. It looked like you were simply splitting based on your personal opinion and without discussion. A health issue temporarily prevented me from clearly reading the block message on your account. I apologize. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha - well the discussion was here, closed in a giant green box above with a comment by an editor in this section, stating the proposed resolution. So the splitting was after quite some discussion and in fact, consensus to split the article. Probably beating a dead horse, but I do want to make sure it's clear why I've done so, as it's a noticeable and quite impactful action. I hope you're feeling better and wish you the best.Keizers (talk) 17:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

You were WAY more patient than I would have been. That was incredibly rude. Red Slash 23:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Concur with User:Red Slash's assessment. Again, I am delighted that User:Keizers has finally undertaken the difficult task of cleaning up what was a pigsty of an article. User:Flyer22 Frozen's conduct was clearly disruptive and rude, yet User:Keizers responded with great patience. We need more editors willing to go the extra mile like that. --Coolcaesar (talk) 05:28, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Coolcaesar, um, no. And don't ping me to this page again. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

We both know from your history at Talk:Frozen (2013 film) how you ~~feel about~~ may go about splitting -- expanding and expanding the article, with no thought given to WP:NOTEVERYTHING, until it looks like there is no choice but to split the article -- and who was considered problematic in that case. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:33, 14 July 2020 (UTC) Tweaked post. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Your ad hominem attack is silly and unconvincing, because you're comparing apples to oranges. (To be clear for third-party observers: I am calling out User:Flyer22 Frozen's conduct for what it is, so I can cite this down the road as making a record that the editor was adequately cautioned.) The Frozen situation was a typical Disney animated film for which Disney was playing the synergy game by developing related products and services, and grew it into a franchise. That was a rapidly evolving situation in which I merely edited the article to match the facts as they developed, and then split out the tangents into an article on the Frozen franchise.

What Keizers was getting at is how shopping mall and shopping center are not the same thing. That was an important conceptual distinction which has already been true for decades (and is not an evolving situation) but which the Wikipedia article on shopping centers failed to adequately reflect. Treating them as synonyms (i.e., the attempt to compare them to pants v. trousers above) makes no sense to anyone who shops in malls and shopping centers regularly. Like many Americans, I figured out that "mall" more commonly refers to an indoor facility by the time I was eight or nine years old. --Coolcaesar (talk) 08:17, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. And today, now that malls are dying in the U.S., if we do go to physical stores, they are usually open-air centers anchored by big-box discount retailers like Costco and Target and Walmart - or smaller ones anchored by supermarkets and pharmacies. No one calls those malls and no one every did... they are types of shopping centers. The whole idea that "mall" would cover all types of shopping centers was never true, not in the U.S. and almost certainly not elsewhere. Oddly enough I have done some work on Southern Africa and I notice that new small strip centers with one supermarket anchor, have "Mall" in the name, but that is, I believe, aspirational.Keizers (talk) 18:05, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Coolcaesar, my "ad hominem attack is silly and unconvincing"? So is your "Flyer22 Frozen's conduct was clearly disruptive and rude", when I clearly explained what happened and apologized. Keizers seemed to understand and stated, "I hope you're feeling better and wish you the best." And then you had to butt in with your nonsense and imply that I'm not great with patience and don't "go the extra extra mile like that", when many editors know me to be like that (except with actual disruptive editors) and to do just that. And you pinged me to make sure I saw your nonsense, and acted like I was supposed to just take your insult and move on. No. And you just pinged me again when I told you not to do so. I suppose you want to be reported for WP:Harassment, because that is exactly what repeatedly pinging someone who has stated that they don't want to be pinged is -- harassment. Editors have been reprimanded for it. So stop it. I can check back at this talk page to read your nonsense without you calling me back to it. And don't downplay your involvement with the Frozen (2013 film) article. You unnecessarily expanded and expanded, as if we needed to cover every last thing. I hope you don't still edit like that. WP:NOTEVERYTHING is policy.

As for your "What Keizers was getting at is how shopping mall and shopping center are not the same thing."? I am interested in what WP:Reliable sources state on that matter. Not personal opinions. And either way, it is fact that things that are not the same thing can be covered on the same page. Keizers stated, "I see this article as the basis for shopping centers in general – a mall being a type of shopping center." We do cover types in a main article without splitting them out into their own articles...unless necessary. Whether it's necessary in this case is something I have left up to others. Furthermore, the move had been closed as "no consensus."

Since you apparently did not get it when I told you not to ping me, let me be very clear: I am not interested in hearing from you. Your "so I can cite this down the road as making a record that the editor was adequately cautioned" is laughable, as if I'm some vandal or something, or have been looking to revert Keizers any further. I clearly stated above, "I don't intend to get involved in this any further." But you just had to ping me and chastise me like I'm some child. Notice that I am not pinging you. Move on. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

A WP:TROUT seems appropriate. If you don't want to be treated like a child, I advise you to stop acting like one. Red Slash 08:01, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Well said. The uncivil tenor of the post above speaks for itself. It's the evasiveness on two critical points that's truly telling, though.

Notice how Flyer22 Frozen only apologized for and explained the failure to properly read Keizers' block, and not for the more significant failure to simply read the extensive discussion on this talk page.

And then there's the apparent ignorance of how shopping centers and shopping malls are not the same thing; people who actually shop regularly take that distinction for granted and would not need to demand reliable sources in lieu of "personal opinions." Of course, I was precocious, but most people who shop, read, or watch television regularly figure out the difference on their own by the time they complete adolescence. And yes, there are reliable sources that imply that the term "shopping mall" connotes an enclosed structure, while a shopping center is not necessarily enclosed, including this one, this one, and this one. To be fair, the last source consistently uses the phrase "enclosed shopping mall" to distinguish a shopping mall from an open-air pedestrian mall like the one in Kalamazoo. --Coolcaesar (talk) 21:50, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

You are so... No, I won't state it. But I will state the following: Like I noted before, I read the discussion(s). But keep on arguing with yourself, I suppose. You speak of ignorance, and yet go on about me failing to recognize shopping centers and shopping malls as not the same thing...when I never stated that they are the same thing. Yes, above, I stated, "For example, we don't have both a Pants and a Trousers article. We cover that in one article because it's the same topic." And that is because I did read the move discussion. I also stated, "Often, subtopics can be covered in one article without needing their own article." The fact that I stated that "we do cover types in a main article without splitting them out into their own articles...unless necessary" apparently went right over your head. Again, I go by what reliable sources state, as many editors at this site know. I did not demand sources. And why would I demand them anyway when I've been clear that I'm not interested in what is happening here? I was called to this talk page more than once. It's not like I expressed interest in participating. The vast majority of my commentary here has been about explaining/defending myself. You and Red Slash are the ones being children here -- ridiculing an editor who commonly patrols via WP:Huggle for making a mistake, a mistake that happened in part due to a serious health issue, when that editor apologized for that mistake. Patrollers make mistakes here and there. When we see that an editor has been blocked after making the type of changes that Keizers made, it is common for us to revert to the WP:Status quo and leave it for others to handle. In this case, I was mistaken about Keizers's block log. You stated, "Of course, [you were] precocious, but most people who shop, read, or watch television regularly figure out the difference on their own by the time they complete adolescence." Take your silly condescension elsewhere. The vast majority of people never think about differentiating between shopping centers and shopping malls. And you know it. A lot of us do not shop regularly, unless it's for essentials. And regardless of how often one shops for clothes or something else, or watches television, that move discussion clearly discusses language differences. I guess the people in the move discussion were just ignorant people who didn't "figure out the difference on their own by the time they complete[d] adolescence"? There's also what Keizers stated just below this post of mine. You stated, "And yes, there are reliable sources that imply that the term 'shopping mall' connotes an enclosed structure, while a shopping center is not necessarily enclosed." Oh. So imply is enough for you. I see. And, Red Slash, I'm just as disappointed in your response as you apparently are in mine. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC) Tweaked post. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

On that last point, I've used as sources one or more books by Longstreth (I have this one in print, it's amazing!, who uses "mall" only for the regional type... and basically when you read his books you will understand that shopping center is a broad term. In fact before the 1950s it meant any collection of adjacent stores, e.g. a city downtown was a "shopping center"...as far as sources I like (and have included in the article)
-also the ICSC table only calls two types of shopping centers "malls" (regional and super-regional);
-the industry source in Australia where they do not use "mall" at all.
-Just found a good source to use for the U.K. that proves that they don't use "mall" (Except for a pedestrian promenade, or in the specific phrase "outlet mall"): Keizers (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for being understanding after I explained what happened, and for pointing to sources to explain your rationale. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Rob wiki.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)