Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CarrefourSA Maltepe Park

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 speedy keep. Note that the nominator has essentially withdrawn in their comment starting with "Reverse". NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:58, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CarrefourSA Maltepe Park

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

Non-notable supermarket SageGreenRider (talk) 01:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:06, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've updated the article with a newspaper source. The shopping mall is a major one in Istanbul, which deserves mentioning. --CeeGee 12:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by nominee As I understand it wikipedia discriminates between notable and non-notable topics and the discrimination threshold is that notable topics have multiple, independent reliable sources. A local newspaper isn't a reliable source (WP:AUD) so having only this source puts this shopping mall below the threshold of discrimination IMHO. SageGreenRider (talk) 02:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pls recheck newly added refs. --CeeGee 08:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse I can't really tell what the quality it but I'll take it on faith that they are now OK. Thanks for improving the article.SageGreenRider (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep As far as I can tell, not all of these sources are local. A market at this size is usually considered notable. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Shopping_malls/archive and Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Malls.--Antigng (talk) 06:34, 7 February 2015 (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.