Deletion of The Mall at Short Hills

Comment: per Opabinia regalis.  The claims to notability seem borderline but plausible.  The references are good, albeit limited.  I thought about trying to apply  (which it would probably fail), but the article is really about the mall, not the company that owns the mall.  I suspect that malls, in general, should probably be considered a form of landmark (landmarks are often privately owned), and while we don't have any specific guidelines for notability of landmarks that I've seen, I think the general notability guidelines about independent non-trivial |reliable source coverage may be sufficient, and by that measure, this may just barely squeeze by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:RS)