Contents

Talk:Galleria Shopping Centre (Toronto)

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Shopping Centers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shopping Centers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of enclosed shopping malls, outdoor shopping centers, and dead malls on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Shopping CentersWikipedia:WikiProject Shopping CentersTemplate:WikiProject Shopping CentersShopping center articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Canada: Ontario / Toronto Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario. This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto.

Tenants[edit]

I will see if I can get us any third-party expertise to bear on the restoration of tenants in conflict with WP:TENANTS -- which reflects the consensus of the relevant wikiproject. --Epeefleche (talk) 01:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess, although that sounds oddly like legalese. What harm does the paragraph do now? It's short and informative. Dontreadalone (talk) 01:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We strive for uniformity in certain respects at the Project. And to not include cruft. Cruft is not as notable as notable material in the article, and distracts from the notable material, and uses up resources needlessly to reflect the non-notable material. The "what harm does it do" argument is as non-weighty here as it is with non-notable malls that are deleted. Even though they exist, and the articles are informative (albeit, about a non-notable mall). The general view is such information, though (if cited to an RS) is true, it may not be sufficiently notable to reflect in an article. You will note, looking at mall articles in general, that they do not usually reflect all tenants (though in some cases there might be hundreds of tenants), but rather just anchors. Which accords with the consensus of the wikiproject, which you edited against. --Epeefleche (talk) 04:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I asked an admin who edits in this area (user:RoySmith) his thoughts as an editor who edits in this area, and received this response. Epeefleche (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that what you did was ask someone already knowing what the response would be. I've never known WikiProjects to act like policy dictators and it remains good sense to take pages case-by-case.

With that in mind, I don't find the sentences distracting and think the "uses up resources" argument is a non-starter in the context of a short stub like this. However, a list of seven for a small centre is perhaps crufty. Can we reduce it to three? FreshCo counts as an anchor and I find it useful to point out that that the McD's outparcel is a tenant, as people in the neighbourhood stopping by the page might not know that. Finally the Dollarama replacing the sports bar is in part the subject of one of the sources.

Do you have a problem with something like "Other tenants include a bank, pharmacy, pet store, and a variety of small clothing shops?" Dontreadalone (talk) 01:25, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've shortened this. It's not a list at all now but still gets across the useful info. Dontreadalone (talk) 03:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Galleria Shopping Centre (Toronto). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224101722/https://strabo.geog.utoronto.ca/graduate/planning/student-work/cip/2006-07-Redeveloping-Greyfields-MCKAY.pdftohttps://strabo.geog.utoronto.ca/graduate/planning/student-work/cip/2006-07-Redeveloping-Greyfields-MCKAY.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not based on facts and contains many personal opinions. I'd remove it altogether. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.143.57.18 (talk) 13:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]