Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sopa Square

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 redirect to List of tallest buildings in Kelowna. Tone 22:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sopa Square

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article about a mixed-use residential/retail development in a midsized city, not properly referenced as the subject of enough reliable source coverage to clear our notability standards for buildings. There's one reference to an article about it in the city's local daily newspaper, which is a start but not in and of itself enough; one reference in the city's local weekly newspaper which just briefly namechecks the building in the process of being fundamentally about a restaurant chain opening a new location in it, and thus is not about the building for the purposes of helping to establish its notability; and one reference ("Castanet") that is not a reliable source at all. As always, the ability to show one or two pieces of purely local coverage in the local media, verifying that the building exists but not doing anything to demonstrate why its existence would be noteworthy to the rest of the world, is not enough. Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NBUILD - no coverage demonstrates that it has "historic, social, economic, or architectural importance".--Pontificalibus 09:10, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As a West Kelowna resident familiar with this development, I can say this has generated a lot of press coverage locally in the Kelowna Daily Courier, Kelowna Capital News, and local born-digital news publications like Castanet.net and INFOnews.ca. It's gone through a bankruptcy, which the Aquilini Investment Group took over, so there was coverage about that. But, I'm not quite sure what our requirement is for real estate buildings and developments. It has helped to reshape and densify/gentrify the South Pandosy neighbourhood of Kelowna, but that was already taking place—this just sort of served as a "catalyst" to accelerate that process. Is that enough? I'm not sure. Ping me with specific policy sections to re-consider my !vote. I would disagree that Castanet.net is not a reliable source; in small- and mid-sized cities, we are woefully out of touch with reality if are only considering TV, radio, and print news sources as notionally "reliable." Perhaps we need a rethink on WP:RS with respect to said cities. FWIW, Kamloops lost its daily newspaper a few years ago, and the Kelowna Daily Courier hasn't released circulation statistics since 2014. It's widely believed to have fallen to as little as 1,000-2,500 subscribers (perhaps less) in a region with 200,000+ people. It has denied rumours of a closure, even when they listed their editorial and print office property for sale and redevelopment, which seems to be on hold, presumably, due to a downturn in the local real estate market. Nonetheless, my reasonable speculation has them closing at or before 2023. Doug Mehus T·C 16:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that community hyperlocals like Castanet can be trusted sources of information within their communities — but they don't make a local-interest topic notable to the rest of the world all by themselves. For example, I might use one of Village Media's midmarket web "newspapers" to source a fact about a person who had already cleared our notability standards, if they had other, stronger sources in general while the VM source happened to be the only locatable source for that particular fact — but I would never claim that a person who had no "inherent" notability claim under any of our regular SNGs had somehow cleared GNG anyway because they had a hit or two in a Village Media publication alone. Just to clarify, because I think you might have misunderstood what I meant about Castanet — I'm not saying it's worthless to you as a resident of the area, but it's not notability-making for our purposes. Bearcat (talk) 18:58, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of tallest buildings in Kelowna

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.