This article is rated C-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. Nevada Start‑class ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada articles Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

There is a lot of history to this mall, I just can't find a reliable source for it. I currently have an email in to Mall Management and to General Growth Properties get more information and permission to use pictures from their site. If anyone knows of a reliable site or reference, let me know and I will add it. Chexmix53 ( talk) 03:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Currently if you search "Boulevard Mall" in wikipedia, it takes you to a mall in Illinois with the same name. I would like to make it so if you search, "Boulevard Mall", "The Boulevard Mall" or "Blvd Mall" it takes you to a page that tells you the names, and where each mall is located so you can choose, but I don't know how to do that. Does anyone else? Chexmix53 ( talk) 03:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC) reply

And if we deleted all the information that was gathered and posted on article from official websites of the subject, then half of Wikipedia would go away.

What other wiki articles should or should not do is not in concern here. Lets see what reputable sources are available and in addition since some folks seem to have alot of viscoscity in their understand use an example of how to reference a URL with the minimum requirement:

The mall may not be doing so well since one of Dillards least profitable stores is closing. ^{[1] [2]}

Of course cutting and pasting those URLs into the cite web tool almost broke something (wind?). ^[3] You act like finding sources and citing them is as bad as getting teeth pulled. I am restoring the tags until you can provide some hint of objective references for the article, and keep noting that the references provided are still problematic.

PB666  ^yap 00:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC) reply

I Have also rated the article according to WikiProject Shopping Centers page guidlines as Start and Low. According to those guidelines . . .

"An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.

The article has a usable amount of good content, but it is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted. Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more. Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation. "

I don't care ....

read above what wiki says. Since they say its a priority I am restoring the tags.

(refactored)

- PB666  ^yap 01:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC) reply

You tell me where to get this reliable 3rd party information from (like how many stores and such) and I will do it. Because the only reliable ways of doing it is getting the information straight from GGP and you think that's a no-no.

Noone said you could not use sources of vested interest, the problem is all the sources are vested in the business promoted by the page. And I showed you at least two sources that give a different view on the going's on at the mall. PB666  ^yap 01:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC) reply

The other way would be original research and you can't do that either. You tell me where to get this information, and why you think it's against wiki-guidlines and so important to get a third party resource on how many stores the mall has. Also please point out which information in the article is important to get third party information for. Thanks! Chexmix53 ( talk) 17:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC) reply

The two tags removed were for a reference to 3rd party information that is unnecessary becasue there is no refutable information on the page. The other tag was claiming that all the information on the page came from a single source when the information is from TWO sources and the tag was added as a result of an argument. If the tags are to be added again, then it should be DISCUSSED on the talk page before hand. Chexmix53 ( talk) 23:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC) reply

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/las-vegas-real-estate-firm-plans-revive-boulevard-mall

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/boulevard-mall-tenant-battles-mold-store

That's about it. Other than the mall is kinda dead. 70.180.188.238 ( talk) 16:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Boulevard Mall. 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/20081017034154/http://www.ggp.com:80/properties/malldirectory.aspx?smuid=600 to http://www.ggp.com/Properties/MallDirectory.aspx?smuid=600

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 19:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC) reply