Former good article nomineeSM Mall of Asia was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed

Untitled edit

Can anyone tell me the meaning of "The mall has the maximum capacity of 5.3 million people". Surely 5.3M people could not get into the mall???? Ray of Davao Philippines —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.39.159 (talk) 02:43, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Reply


a edit

Very cool article, never realized they had such large malls in South East Asia. Keep up the good work. --Madchester 01:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply


According to the entry the claim is that it is the third largest mall in terms of retail floor space (at least previously, it seems someone changed it to gross floor area which is probably something disputable). I think I saw a website somewhere that compared the biggest malls in the world including those newer ones in China and if that site is to be believed the retail floor area claim holds [edit: I have included it as the external link "Shopping Mall Studies"]. Actually if that website is correct West Edmonton Mall is smaller than claimed in this Wikipedia article, although the impression I'm left with is that West Edmonton and some of the Chinese malls are larger by other metrics. There's probably room for other candidates to crack the list depending upon definition. For example is the undeveloped land area outside the mall supposed to be included in the tally? Is the outside car park? If you are talking in terms of just the main buildings, I think SM Mall of Asia delivers although I have no first hand point of reference comparing to the other giant malls outside the Philippines.

As a local, looking at the figures I didn't realize that Mall of Asia is only 10-20% larger in retail floor area than the formerly largest mall here in the Philippines, the SM Megamall in Mandaluyong. The quick impression one might have is that Mall of Asia is much larger than the figures would suggest but I think the fact that Mall of Asia is essentially a 2 story mall that is spread out with a third story for additional carpark space while SM Megamall is a more compact five-story mall can affect one's perception.

By the way, I know it's early days yet but I wonder how full those other large malls get? West Edmonton is not located in a very highly populated city and I've heard of it having difficulty retaining tenants. Having just come back from Mall of Asia I can tell you that despite its size the place is stuffed with people. Considering that SM Megamall more than ten years after it opened continues to draw hoards of people despite the passing of time and the opening of many other malls, I get the feeling Mall of Asia might compete in the most jam packed mall category. Those Chinese malls may do even better there though so who knows?

It is a shame that when something legitimately grand is built or achieved in these parts the first to cast doubt or the ones most vociferous and intent on speaking ill of it are those for whom it is built for. So many crabs. In my opinion that entire section questioning the building's structural integrity is inappropriate for this article and smacks of rumor but since it does give what could be considered additional information I won't be the one to change it.

What I would like to see included in the article is a wide angle picture of the inside of the mall during a weekend when it is full of people. That may give a pretty good idea of just how big and popular it is.


Do you even know how to read and understand what you read. If you do. Have read the article saying the third biggest mall in the world IN TERMS OF GROSS FLOOR SIZE next to China's biggest mall.


I am new zealander and i travel a lot. I have seen all the malls you have mentioned. and I have been to Mall of Asia. YES i can say third biggest mall in the world.


Is it the 3rd largest ?


Malaysian malls edit

There are several in KL that are advertised as larger. Eg Berjaya Times Square 7.5million, Midvalley 4.5million, ÆON 2.1 million, 1 Utama 5million, Queensbay 2.5 million, Sunway Pyramid 1.6 million, The curve 0.6 million, subang parade 0.5 (all in square feet)

I think it depends on the criteria being measured. You can measure the size of a mall by floor space, retail floor space, etc. --Madchester 15:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply
i think its just false advertising. Offhand, i can count quite a number in China that are also larger. eg South China mall 10million, Golden Resources 7million, Beijing 5million, Panda 4.5million, Grandview 4.5million


Anyone can cite a source supporting this "3rd largest" claim? Or else it should be removed from the page. changed 05:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply
Changed it into "one of the biggest malls" to make it NPOV. --Jojit fb 06:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

So I see nothing about my (beloved) Mall of America. Did it shrink in size? Please, I hope not! Help! Acidradio 07:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

What about its notable shops? (e.g. SM Mall of Asia opened the country's first IKEA and Sears [it's just an example]) - 202.81.183.192 18:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply


--- Well, they (SMMoA) do claim they are the largest mall in Asia to date. I saw an info-stand inside the mall where facts are written, at least facts "in their PoV". When I get back there I'll take a picture of their claim. ---


Berjaya Times Square is indeed larger when it comes to gross floor size. However, much of the mall's upper stories are closed. Actually, some even consider the mall a white elephant.

I'll stick to my belief that Mall of Asia is still the larges in South East Asia and perhaps the world's second largest outside China. Can anyone confirm if this is larger than the West Edmonton Mall? -Fifteencounts


--- fifteencounts, ok, maybe we should not count berjaya times square then...so how about Midvalley, ÆON, 1 Utama, Queensbay, Sunway Pyramid, The curve or subang parade (which are larger than mall of asia) whereby those malls have almost full tenants ??? - egard89 ---

Upper Class? edit

"It is the second SM mall to cater to the upper and upper-middle class"

Does it? Everytime I go there, the few "upper class" people that I see are swamped by the hordes of...well...more common people. Is this in a press release by SM or something? Shrumster 10:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Direct quote from a reputable source.[1] "Like Sy’s other malls, this one is aimed at a lower-to-middle-income shopper.". That's that. Shrumster 18:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Size and Effect edit

It's been a while since I have left the Philippines, and being here in Thailand for almost over a year- I could say that sizes can only be measured technically. As here in Bangkok- malls tend to grow tall unlinke in the Philippines malls spread wide like farmlands. I would rather encourage architects and engineers to tour around the world first before designing another mall. Practicality should be weighed not just with numbers and construction should be noted as surely this race of giant malls are designed by untested sturctural designs- 50% Profit oriented 30% aesthetics 20% safety and others. Most companies are careful in safety because of legal actions which can be posed against them.

Referring to "Classes" in the Philippines... I am not concerned much about the contest, but the effect of malls to the national industry. Conceals reality. Studies should be made on the effects of malls economically. Trade and commerce are shifting towards an imbalanced growth. Thanks but no thanks. Aesthetically it's beautiful, but there is something else better. Malls create more spending than profit for the citizens there... I just badly wish it created attraction for tourists, somehow.
Which makes me think- why not build bridges to connect some islands and reduce ferry accidents..supported by the rich and tycoons in the Philippines. A REAL PUBLIC SERVICE.

issue about the mall of asia being a high-end mall. edit

well judging from most of the stores and restaurants, even cinema ticket prices, this one's a high-end mall. if this a lower to middle income mall, why whould it have high-end stores such as Zara, Marks & Spencer, Charriol, Tag Heuer etc.?(this stores are considered high-end in the Philippines) or having cinema ticket prices ranging from P150-P350?Akosikupal 10:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

MISTAKE IN THE MALL RANKING edit

On your First Paragraph for the article "SM mall of asia" - you ranked the mall as number 7:

The SM Mall of Asia is the largest shopping mall in the Philippines and the 7th largest shopping mall in the world in terms of gross floor size, after the South Dongguan Mall (China), Golden Resources Mall (China), Central World Plaza (Thailand), Seacon Square (Thailand), Runwal Arcade - Mumbai (India). It opened on May 21, 2006.[1]

But on your article for "List of largest buildings in the world" -- sm mall of asia was ranked 5ft and it was SM City North EDSA that was ranked 7

FOR CORRECTION

Actually, it depends on how you measure the size of a mall. For example, if you based it on Gross Leasable Area (GLA), SM Mall of Asia ranks 3rd; SM Megamall 5th; SM City North EDSA 9th. This is according to Forbes Magazine. --- Laibcoms (talk | Contribs) 01:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Must be something wrong with this ranking. Article says it is the third largest in PH, but the forth in the world. That would mean that 3/4 of top 4 malls in the world are in PH, and they are not. Shouldn't third be second after SM City? /2010-09-29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.253.13.12 (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

objective edit

what are your objective in your business?

Bot report : Found duplicate references ! edit

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "MST2007Jan16" :
    • {{cite news | last =Veneracion | first =Connie | title =The pyro-olympics experience | work =Op-Editorial: SassyLawyer | language =english | publisher =Manila Standard Today | date = [[2007-01-16]] | url =http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=connieVeneracion_jan16_2007 | accessdate = 2007-02-15 }}
    • {{cite news | last =Salumbides | first =Willie A., jr. | title =Pretty young thing on ice | work =Sports stories | language =english | publisher =Manila Standard Today | date = 2007-01-16 | url=http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=sports1_jan16_2007 | accessdate = 2007-02-15 }}

DumZiBoT (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Mall of Asia ranks 2nd in 2009 edit

Well, since SM's first shopping mall will take over the ranking of SM Mall of Asia, therefore, it will become the second biggest mall in the country and will be ranked as the 5th largest shopping mall in the world after Dubai Mall, Golden Resources Mall and SM City North EDSA. Kamatis.kamote (talk) 22:49 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Say what "SM" stands for edit

Please say what "SM" stands for, early in the article. S&M? Jidanni (talk) 06:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

SM Stands for Shoemart. Talker26 (talk) 12:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Cite 13 edit

Was able to fix some of the naked references here with proper cite news tags. However, it seems that cite 13 does not exist. I hope that this ref would be replaced or the entry related to it be removed --Lenticel (talk) 07:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

GAN Nomination edit

Just a note to say that there is a citation needed tag on the Mall of Asia Eye Ferris wheel section. This will have to be sorted before the article gets GA status. AIRcorn (talk) 12:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:SM Mall of Asia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 16:50, 23 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

There are quite a few issues with this article; I've highlighted the main ones below. If we can clear these us, I can go through in more detail. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

  • Sections like "Esplanade" need proper paragraphs.

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

  • Some of the references links are broken (e.g. fn 1), others (e.g. fn3, fn 4) don't lead to any relevant piece.

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

  • Sections like "Esplanade", "Physical details" and "Construction" (amongst others) are pretty much unreferenced.

(c) it contains no original research.

  • The lack of citations at the moment means it would fail on OR.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

  • The gallery doesn't fit with the wikipedia image use policy.

The Unity run section edit

Hi. I was asked to comment here at my talk page by IP 2.26.132.73 regarding the removal of the "Unity run" section. I believe the main reason it was removed is that it was not well-written. As an example, the word string: "is based on the number of participants a record". It's well-cited and probably notable enough to be mentioned, so it could be added back to the article, but ideally, that would happen somewhere under the "History" section. Thanks! Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 22:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:23, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply