Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BLVD Place

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 no consensus. Editors don't agree as to whether the sources identified meet WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) buidhe 14:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLVD Place (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article about a mixed-use development fails WP:NGEO. Many of the references read like press releases and therefore, in my opinion, they should not be considered independent of the subject. Also, many of the sources are from before the development was fully constructed, which calls into question its historic, social, economic, or architectural importance according to WP:NBUILD.  Bait30  ^Talk? 19:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Bait30  ^Talk? 19:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions.  Bait30  ^Talk? 19:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  Bait30  ^Talk? 19:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I've added three two references, all of which were written after the development was completed. The third particularly shows the social significance of the development to the surrounding area. Disregard final statement; unreliable reference. Regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:25, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per above. Ambrosiawater (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PERX LibStar (talk) 04:36, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is a WP:ROTM development. According to the article, its claim to fame is that it's the biggest development in Uptown Huston (note, that's a business district, not half of the city). Most of the sources are regurgitated press releases, and almost half of them are now dead links. There's no real claim of notability. --Slashme (talk) 09:37, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:GNG. Gnews just reveals passing mentions or something that happened at an individual shop of the development. LibStar (talk) 14:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep easily passes notability per multiple sources that all date from well after the center's completion. The coverage easily extends beyond the everyday and shows that the center is notable. WP:ROTM is not policy, and "happened at an individual shop of the development" is kind of how malls are supposed to work. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 10:01, 28 February 2020 (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.