Chair Pro Tem of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors : I am ambivalent about draftification or deletion, 60:40 in favour of deletion 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hold Delete I Agree but I tried to get restores but all the independent sources you have to pay to  view it and I can't view it Examples Los Angeles times I don't Agree with moving forward with deletion but we need more independent sources you can help me find independent sources on sites the you have to pay like Los Angeles times I would appreciate you thank you.  FYE31 ( talk ) 22:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Besides the lack of any coverage specifically about this position itself, being a procedual rotating position means that it's identical to Chair of Los Angeles County except shifted by one year.  Non-notable and of little actual use.  Moreover, I will remove this from the infoboxes of Zev Yaroslavsky and other officeholders: Again, there are zero sources describing the significance of being the procedural #2 of a five-person board (always preceeding being the chair) so why does this need to take up space here?  Reywas92 Talk 04:58, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Delete - In view of the fact that it shifts with Chair of Los Angeles County , it is a useless list.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 05:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  No point in draftifying, IMO; it has been shown already not to have sufficient sources for notability.  -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 17:45, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] is there a way to make it sufficient?  This page is more like a Mayor Pro Tem page.  Also some people have also added new sources on the page as well.  FYE31 ( talk ) 18:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG ; an editor moved the page from the draft to the mainspace even though it's been declined and didn't go through the AFC process.  It's also just a rotating position and I don't see any sources that give the position any significance.  reppop talk 22:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A mayor pro tem is a rotating position as well with I think what this page was shooting for just in the county level any suggestions to fix this page reppop?  FYE31 ( talk ) 04:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't see anything that makes it satisfy WP:GNG .  Even when I search on Google, there's no secondary sources about the position itself.  Have you read the comments before moving the page into mainspace?  reppop talk 05:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I founded sources on la times but I had to pay to view it according to the County charter the position is more like a mayor pro tem but on the county level that's why I think it's hard to find resources I also want to change the name and it was my first time doing it I thought it would still be a draft article I'm new on wicipidia so I didn't know want happened FYE31 ( talk ) 06:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG draftifying and improving the article won't be a good choice either as per the past history of the article.  NP83 ( talk ) 01:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi NP83 do you suggest we delete this page and start over with a new draft page?  FYE31 ( talk ) 04:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ FYE31 First of all let me correct you, it's not we it's an admin who will delete or keep the page (in most cases) but a page can be deleted by an Admin only.  Now coming to your question my answer is according to you let's suppose that the AFD result is delete, you are still welcome to create the same draft and make improvements accordingly, by taking help of other AFC reviewers.  If WP:COI please disclose it.  When you think that your draft is ready for submission then submit the draft for AFC review.  Your job is done for that.  I hope you got my point what I mean to say, Thank you.  NP83 ( talk ) 05:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I met we as in this group I believe In giving second chances on wikipedia Pages let's be the solution not calling all page a lost cause I think the creator of this page was shooting for a mayor pro tem page but in a county level I'm trying to find resources to be apart of the situation.  FYE31 ( talk ) 06:51, 26 April 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete