Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in India

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of shopping malls in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Not sure if this should or shouldn't be deleted, so I figured I'd let the community decide. Looks like an indescriminate list of shopping malls, and, from what I can tell, Wikipedia is not a directory. Rockstar915 06:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Shopping malls are major structures so I don't think WP:NOT#DIR exactly applies here. They are especially relevant in parts of the world where not every town with more than 500 people has one. A number of the malls on the list are blue-linked and notable. The main problem is that the articles that have no links need to be sourced. Were it a list of living persons, I might argue differently, but in this case I think we should keep and tag the article with {{unreferenced}}. Most of the content seems easily verifiable (I did a google search for 5 randomly-selected malls). If there is a consensus to keep if sourced, I will go through and source any entries that are not blue-linked. Cheers, Black Falcon 08:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Mereda 09:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per the precedent set at Category:Lists of shopping malls, Lists of shopping malls, it looks like most Wikipedia believes these are not indescriminate lists. I must agree; this is not just directory, but useful. Part Deux 10:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which precedent are you talking about? utcursch | talk 14:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - the list is not indiscriminate. --Canley 10:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Black Falcon. This seems like a helpful list and not a directory or a collection of indiscriminate information. - Anas ^Talk? 11:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep as it seems wrong to single out India, but the articles in it better be sourced soon, because a list of redlinks CAN be deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think India was singled out particularly. Rather, this probably just happened to be the article that the nominator ran across. Given the developing consensus for keep, I will start going through and sourcing the entries where I can in 2-3 hours. Cheers, Black Falcon 18:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I didn't mean to single out India, I just noticed a bunch of red links, and wanted to bring it to the community. No bad faith here. Rockstar915 17:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep per precendent. I'm no fan of "List of X" articles, and while I don't feel a list of shopping malls in any country belongs in an encyclopedia, we can't delete this but then not the others. And that's not going to happen. Arkyan 20:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep per the earlier arguments Manzhivago — Manzhivago (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Comment Just out of curiosity, aren't lists like this meant for Categories? It seems like any shopping mall in India should be placed in a "Shopping Malls in India" category, rather than having a separate entry for such lists... I guess I agree with everyone that per current Wikipedia regulations, the list should stand. But maybe the topic of categories instead of lists should be discussed?
  • You raise an important issue. I'd like to reply with 5 points.

1. Categories only work for persons/objects/events that already have WP articles.
2. Whereas lists can be referenced, categories are more difficult to do (each article must be referenced).
3. Not everyone finds categories easier-to-use than lists.
4. Lists can provide additional information about individual entries (which categories cannot).
5. Per WP:LIST, lists that aid in navigation, are informative, and/or are used for development purposes are allowed.

• • I think categories are useful and should be used in many cases. However, I don't see why they cannot exists side-by-side with lists. In essence, I don't think being a list is itself a reason for deletion unless the list is highly inferior in quality to the category, which requries that it be redundant (all info contained in one is contained in the other), unreferenced, and simply a listing of names without any additional information or any form of subdivision (e.g., by location, time, etc.). Cheers, Black Falcon 01:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to say, this is why I love Wikipedia. :) Rockstar915 01:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per precedent -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in Malaysia. A clear case of WP:NOT#DIR. Even if the shopping malls are themselves notable, categories suffice in this case. An example of a worthy list would be List of largest shopping malls in the United States (Before somebody cries bias, let me explain -- I'm from India). Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in Singapore. utcursch | talk 14:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see my comment above about the disadvantages of categories: bias toward objects with articles, cannot be referenced, not necessarily more user-friendly, and limited capability to provide additional information. Let's please remember that most articles start out in a poor state. It takes time for them to reach the quality of List of largest shopping malls in the United States. If we deleted everything at the outset because it wasn't of the highest quality, we would have only a few dozen articles. Cheers, Black Falcon 17:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep list of notable structures. No reason why list of malls in India is less notable than List of shopping malls in the United States. --Vsion 06:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and cleanup Topic is worthwhile, but most of these places are not notable.--Sefringle 07:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. If we have a List of shopping malls in the United States (as well as a List of largest shopping malls in the United States) and a List of shopping centres in the United Kingdom, we can also have a List of shopping malls in India. Indian shopping centers are as notable as US or UK shopping centers. --Carioca 04:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per Carioca and BlackFalcon.--Atemperman 05:02, 26 February 2007 (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.