Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was Merge and redirect to Los Angeles County, California. (non-admin closure) KTC (talk) 00:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Essentially, see WP:NOTWEBHOST: Wikipedia is not your web host. This page is a recap of http://planning.lacounty.gov/ and is used for exactly the same purpose: to familiarize local citizens with what the department is and what services it offers, with links to relevant Department of Regional Planning sites. It's local directory stuff, not encyclopedic. The LA Department of Regional Planning is the subject of routine local news coverage, but not the focus of sustained coverage by secondary sources as required by WP:N. Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 23:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 23:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect/Merge to Los Angeles County, California, where it already has a sentence or two. This article has no independent references; much of it is repeated verbatim all over the web at the agency's social media sites, although I doubt if that constitutes a COPYVIO. Google News archive finds a ton of mentions, but they are not in-depth or significant coverage; they amount to "the Los Angeles County Planning Commission decided such-and-such." I grant you, Los Angeles County is bigger than most states (if it were a state it would rank 9th in population) and in fact many countries, and its agencies all deal with huge swaths of population and territory, but that doesn't obviate the need for significant coverage by independent reliable sources. --MelanieN (talk) 01:44, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge & Redirect per reasoning given by MelanieN. Although the subject has multiple mentions in News and published books, none appear to be significantly in-depth to warrant passage of WP:GNG.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.