Talk:Summit Place Mall

Note to self

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=DTNB&s_site=detnews&f_site=detnews&f_sitename=Detroit+News%2C+The+%28MI%29&p_multi=DTNB&p_theme=gannett&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0F7B8BD239A38899&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Notability

This mall no longer exists and has questionable notability. Thomas Paine1776 (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

• Whether or not something is still functional is immaterial, otherwise we wouldn't have articles on canceled TV series, defunct retail chains, etc. Notability is not temporary. In case you have any doubts now, I've added a source verifying it as the first enclosed mall in Michigan. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Is it still considered a viable site for development by the locality? What are the prospects for development? Does the locality still regard the site an important site and why? What does the locality plan to do with the site? Has it basically been replaced by other sites and not regarded as particularly notable except that it was once the first enclosed mall? It seems some of these points or some related points should be addressed in the article. Just that its no longer used and its going to be demolished are not particlarly notable reasons to have an article. There does seem to be local speculation that it could become a Walmart Super Center or be converted to a residential area. So maybe it can be improved, since there is some interest. Thanks.Thomas Paine1776 (talk) 16:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

There's your ticket. Improve, not delete. Still, the fact that it was at one time a fully viable, super-regional mall, and the fact that it was the first fully enclosed mall in Detroit, are more than enough to establish notability for all time. Even if there are no plans for redevelopment at the present time, it was notable for its size and status, and so it always will be. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Its not quite the same thing as art, music, or a former TV series. It was already mentioned in a list. A bull dozed former mall development site is not necessarily notable in and of itself. It should include some architectural component, historic aspect, prospective plans, etc.Thomas Paine1776 (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't be dense. There are more than enough assertations of notability here even if the article lacks some historical info. I love how you're completely ignoring the fact that there are plenty of sources in the article, which is always a sure sign that hey, maybe this place is notable. Would you argue that Dixie Square Mall isn't notable just because it's been abandoned for 30 years and no one's done anything with it? That Montgomery Ward is not notable because none of their stores are in operation? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps this discussion should be moved to. WP:N/N Eomund (talk) 00:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm here as a third opinion, in response to a request made for one. My role is to provide another opinion to help the dispute move forwards. I think that the important policy here is that notability is not temporary - if something is deemed to be notable at one point, it remains notable. The issue is therefore whether or not this mall was ever notable - if there is significant coverage in a number of reliable sources, then it is notable (regardless of its condition now). If we agree that the sources provided were enough to establish notability when the mall was functional, then we can accept that it remains notable and that such an article should exist. If you have any further problems, let me know - I'll continue to watch this page for a little while. Hope I've been of some help. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a fair question for the OP to ask, whether the Mall was ever notable. IMO the evidence is very borderline, several of the references are not properly formatted and several links are broken, making verification of the claims difficult. WP:CORP states that local news coverage does not normally count towards notability. On the other hand the Mall was in existence for many decades, which makes one think it should have attracted significant attention. Currently there is at least one very heated debate about a shopping mall in AfD, which shows that opinion amongst editors is divided. Sionk (talk) 16:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Precedent is that local coverage usually works for mall articles; compare Merle Hay Mall, a GA which uses mostly sources from Des Moines newspapers, or Crossroads Mall (Florida) which was kept due to several sources from the St. Petersburg newspaper. Summit Place started dying in the 90s, so more of the in-depth coverage of it might be in offline sources. Also as I said, there is a precedent that any mall classified as "super regional" (i.e., 1 million square feet or bigger) is notable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Summit Place Mall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928013519/http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/111005/loc_2005111001.shtml to http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/111005/loc_2005111001.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070810225412/http://www.theoaklandpress.com:80/stories/111805/loc_2005111801.shtml to http://theoaklandpress.com/stories/111805/loc_2005111801.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100121015851/http://www.freep.com:80/article/20100119/BUSINESS06/100119052/1019/JCPenney-store-in-Waterford-to-close to http://www.freep.com/article/20100119/BUSINESS06/100119052/1019/JCPenney-store-in-Waterford-to-close

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)