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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley Square Mall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

un-Notable mall. I don't see the value of keeping it. Phearson (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malls-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: It is a regional mall[1], but at first glance it may be a tougher case for individual notability, in which case I would redirect and add a paragraph to Cleveland, Tennessee about the mall.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 20:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Keep per work by Dravecky.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 02:52, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a regional mall that crosses the verifiability and notability thresholds. I have added several references to the article but a quick swim through Google News finds many more with the mall as the subject, including real estate transactions, retail updates, events at the mall, and such. There are also nice in-depth pieces like "Keely, Harrison (June 6, 2010). "Out of the box at Bradley Square Mall". Chattanooga Times Free Press. Retrieved March 14, 2011." to seal the notability deal. - Dravecky (talk) 22:11, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 01:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   -- Lear's Fool 13:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - the Chattanooga Times Free Press piece is just good enough for me. Kansan (talk) 17:21, 23 March 2011 (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.