Shortcut

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Malls. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Shopping malls|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Malls. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch

Shopping malls

Shopping parade

Shopping parade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTDICT. This is just a fancy term for a line of shops; there is nothing to say on the subject. TheLongTone (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Agree that there is nothing much to say on the subject. And, in any case, it is term that would be readily understood by the majority of readers. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NOTADICTIONARY jolielover♥talk 17:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- violates WP:NOTDICT. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, WP:NOTDICT. Additionally, Redirect + Merge with Strip mall. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 18:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, but do not redirect to Strip mall; this is just a name used in England for a street with shops along it, which is not a strip mall. I2Overcome talk 18:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Technically, shops came along later and aren't fundamental to parades, according to the book that I finally found. But yes, going by what the book says, U.K. parades and arcades and promenades and esplanades are definitely not strip malls. Uncle G (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Also agree this should not be redirected to Strip mall Mrfoogles (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's false anyway. That's not at all how "parade" comes to be used like this. ISBN 9781119881032 pp. 144–145. Delete. Uncle G (talk) 20:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • So what you're saying is that you have another independent reliable source about parade's of shops. That looks like another reason to keep Neonchameleon (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • It is about parades not having shops in the first place, so it is a reason that what you are inventing is unverifiable against an expert-written source. Uncle G (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        • So you're claiming that a claim sourced to a reliable source was something I invented? Not only are you using reliable sources that demonstrate notability in some bizarre argument to delete, but wp:AGF springs to mind. Neonchameleon (talk) 21:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm using a source from an expert in English language socio-linguistic history who explains that parades are actually railway and seafront things, and shopping is incidental. This does not in any way demonstrate notability of assertions that the source flatly contradicts. Are you going to invent shopping arcade too? The expert explains that those are arcades with shops, and that's how we actually have them in Wikipedia. Uncle G (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
            • I'm sorry. Are you literally accusing me of inventing the terms "shopping parade" and "parade of shops"? When between the two terms there are already approaching a couple of hundred uses on Wikipedia with only a tiny handful of them being near railways or seafronts? We have another example here of someone who doesn't understand the term, thus further refuting the idea it will be understood by an overwhelming majority of readers. Neonchameleon (talk) 23:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Why the nominator thinks there's nothing to say on the subject is beyond me and looks like a clear failure of wp:before. Multiple reliable sources on the subject are part of the stub, thus passing wp:N - and at least one of the sources goes into the history, making it subject to the wp:WORDISSUBJECT exception for the notadictionary policy. The idea that "the term would be understood by the majority of readers" would have a whole lot of pages eliminated (like strip mall) and is nothing more than wp:IDONTLIKEIT; the deletion standards are far higher than "the majority" while the fact that one of the contributors thinks it should be merged with strip mall demonstrates conclusively that even among Wikipedians participating in this AfD not everyone understands what a parade of shops is. Neonchameleon (talk) 20:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Did any of the chorus of deletes do a WP:BEFORE on this topic? It's patently false that "there is nothing to say".
  • Astaire (talk) 03:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, otherwise logically I couldn't have found and pointed to an source from an expert at the University of Cambridge explaining that Historic England has got it wrong. The London Assembly report is a good example, in fact. It starts talking about "neighbourhood parades". As the expert explains, parades were railway (and also seafront) things in the U.K. that evolved into long social-activity streets, and shopping is incidental to the fact that people parade up and down them doing social stuff in general. Xe doesn't support shopping parades as distinct any more than xe supports all of the U.K.'s Station Parades as distinct singular concepts. Amusingly, your A&C source even told you that parades are social centres, had you but read its abstract, which is a bit ironic given what you are calling out other people for. You're clearly doing superficial research by mere title phrase matching. After all, if you had even got as far as reading the executive summary of the London Assembly report you would have seen it in reality cover corner shops (not unexpected given the title), shopping centres, supermarkets, and small businesses. Further on it goes into town and country planning in the United Kingdom under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. This is the usual oft-seen at AFD poor show of throwing title phrase matches into a discussion, accusing everyone else of not doing the work, without actually doing the work of reading the things that are matched. Uncle G (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, otherwise logically I couldn't have found and pointed to an source from an expert at the University of Cambridge explaining that Historic England has got it wrong. You have shown no such thing, beyond vague gesturing at a source that in reality contradicts you. The Social Life of Words explicitly acknowledges that a "shopping parade" is a real phenomenon with a distinct definition.
      • "However, the young people on monkey parades also paraded along SHOPPING PARADES in the sense of ‘short urban or suburban stretches of shops’. The Oxford English Dictionary conflates both these senses under parade, n. 1 4.: ‘a public square or promenade; (also) a row of shops in a town, or the street on which they are situated’."
      • "The reason parade developed the meaning ‘short suburban stretch of shops selling basic necessities’ was due to the building boom of the second half of the nineteenth century caused by the advent of rail travel."
      The London Assembly report is a good example, in fact. It starts talking about "neighbourhood parades". The report uses the term "shopping parade" more often than it does "neighbourhood parade", and in context "neighbourhood parades" is clearly a synonym for shopping parades, given that the report is entirely about retail shops.
      shopping is incidental to the fact that people parade up and down them doing social stuff in general. Xe doesn't support shopping parades as distinct Again, see the two quotes above. This is a stunning misrepresentation of the source.
      Amusingly, your A&C source even told you that parades are social centres Please do not selectively quote from the source when we can all read it. The article makes it clear that the primary function of shopping parades is shopping, not socializing.
        • "Thousands of shopping parades were built on suburban high roads and in estates, providing the residents of these new communities not just with a local place to shop for their daily (or more major needs) but also offering a center for local activities and interactions, both informal and formal."
        • "Interwar suburban shopping parades remain today in their thousands, providing a highly visible material record of a time and place where changes in retailing, in consumption and in investment practices gave birth to new retail environments and transformed the street scene. In an era of mass consumerism that facilitated shopping for pleasure as well as daily needs, these smart and welcoming new buildings were a characteristic element of many people’s everyday environment."
      Astaire (talk) 12:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Astaire and Neonchameleon. Also, I was able to find a bit more coverage of shopping parades in Innovation: The History of England Volume VI by Peter Ackroyd. Opm581 (talk | he/him) 08:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Malls
No tags for this post.