Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Torosis
- 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 delete. As one participant noted, Santa Monica employs the council-manager form of government. The mayoral position is ceremonial, not elected. "Keep" !votes based solely on the size of the city and the role of mayor were accordingly discounted. The all-green source analysis table was also duly challenged for ascribing significance to sources that only tangentially cover the subject. This leaves us with a rough consensus to delete the article. I see no calls for an ATD, but editors are welcome to recreate the page as a redirect. Owen× ☎ 18:39, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or{{subst:csp|sock username|sockmaster username}}. |
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Caroline Torosis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Requested at the Teahouse. Request reads:
--ABx11 (she/they) 21:11, 18 August 2026 (UTC)The page Caroline Torosis is very promotional and not notable. She is a city council member who gets to be honorary mayor for a year, as do all city council members. The page is clearly emphasizing the honorary position and not that she works full time for one of LA’s district supervisors.. not an expert so need help.. ~2026-45286-26 (talk) 20:13, 18 August 2026 (UTC) (55 min. ago)
- Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and California. Shellwood (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2026 (UTC)
- Keep She is the mayor of a well known city with a population of nearly 100,000 people and the article seems to me to be neutrally written and well referenced. I was easily able to find additional coverage of her in reliable sources. If the temporary account can point out non-neutral phrasing, the article can be edited to improve the neutrality instead of deleting it. Press coverage pays more attention to her role on the city council and as mayor than her job as an aide to a Los Angeles County supervisor, and therefore so too should her Wikipedia biography. Cullen328 (talk) 23:38, 18 August 2026 (UTC)
- Keep The arguments against involving other mayors are WP:OTHERSTUFF. The notability is present for an article to exist and it's existence is not a detriment or a disruption to the encyclopedia as a whole. DarmaniLink (talk) 20:16, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment I nominated her for primarily for failing WP:NPOL and WP:GNG.Caroline Torosis is a Santa Monica City Council member (elected 2022) who previously served on the Rent Control Board. The “mayor” title is a one-year rotating position selected by the council based on seniority (longest continuous service, with vote totals as a tiebreaker for those elected in the same cycle), not a separately elected strong-mayor office with independent executive authority. Santa Monica operates under a council-manager form of government; the mayor mainly presides over meetings and serves in a largely ceremonial/head-of-city role. The city’s population is approximately 93,000 (2020 census). WP:NPOL is clear: politicians who have held international, national, or state/province-wide office are presumed notable, and “major local political figures who have received significant press coverage” may be. However, “Just being an elected local official… does not guarantee notability,” although such people can still qualify under the general notability guideline (GNG) if they have significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Routine local election results, council votes, city meeting coverage, and local-government reporting do not establish this. Most sources in the article (and easily findable coverage) are local outlets such as the Santa Monica Daily Press, Santa Monica Lookout, city/YouTube records of meetings, and similar pieces about her election, swearing-in, housing votes, or routine city business. These are expected for any council member in a city of this size and do not constitute the in-depth, independent biographical treatment GNG requires. Minor local awards or selection for a fellowship do not bridge the gap. The article leads heavily with the temporary mayor title and under-emphasizes that this is a standard council rotation and that her other professional role is as a policy director for an LA County supervisor.City council members (and rotating mayors) of mid-sized U.S. cities routinely lack standalone articles unless they have demonstrated broader impact or sustained non-routine coverage. Creating an article primarily because someone currently holds the rotating chair is not consistent with policy; the content can be covered on the Santa Monica or Santa Monica City Council pages if needed.
~2026-45286-26 (talk) 23:49, 18 August 2026 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. As the nomination explanation said, her position as "mayor" is a rotating position that city councilmembers hold, and with very limited powers. This is a city with a population under 100K run under a council-manager system. I can recall several recent past deletion discussions where the consensus was that serving as mayor in those circumstances fails to adequately establish notability, and she certainly fails NPOL in any event. As written, the article primarily cites local news outlets that provide information about the subject only tangentially, i.e., without a focus on her biography. Deleting absolutely makes sense here. PA Uploader (talk) 12:44, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- The article says she first was "mayor pro tempore" for a year, and now is just mayor. Are these both honorary positions or what exactly is the situation? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 13:35, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- @Maddy from Celeste, per the Santa Monica City Council website:
The Santa Monica City Council is made up of seven members elected at-large for staggered four-year terms. Every two years, after each election, the City Council selects one of its members to serve as Mayor and another to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore.
PA Uploader (talk) 15:05, 19 August 2026 (UTC)- I also read the rules of order on that website. It seems like the mayor pro tempore is essentially a vice-chair of the council, but freely elected as opposed to the mayor? In that case, agree that there's no presumption of notability per NPOL. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:43, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- They are both honorary city council positions that go to the most senior council member who hasn’t been mayor. They chose them every two years, one become the mayor for a year and the other is “the mayor in waiting” until they become mayor next year. Basically they get to lead the city council discussions and still make the same $18k a year regular city council members make. The city council members aren’t full time employees. ~2026-45286-26 (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- I also read the rules of order on that website. It seems like the mayor pro tempore is essentially a vice-chair of the council, but freely elected as opposed to the mayor? In that case, agree that there's no presumption of notability per NPOL. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:43, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- @Maddy from Celeste, per the Santa Monica City Council website:
Comment: Since I created the nomination, even though it was on behalf of someone else, am I free to vote or does my nomination count on my behalf? --ABx11 (she/they) 19:09, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- I am not voting because I put it in the tea house so you can vote imo. ~2026-45658-57 (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
- Strong keep. For full disclosure, I am a significant contributor to this article. The subject very clearly meets WP:N and WP:BASIC. Torosis has received WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources WP:RS, including the LA Times, the Los Angeles Business Journal, MSN, the Santa Monica Daily Press, and others. Some prior commenters have criticized the Daily Press for being a "local" paper, but its circulation and readership show that it is a significant news source (see ). In the media landscape of Los Angeles, it's not possible for the LA Times and national news to cover events in large LA-area cities like Santa Monica. I will try to add more news coverage to the article. Notecardforfree (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- Can you point to the articles of significant coverage that cover her life or activities outside being a city council or rent control board member? I couldn’t find anything but city council coverage and WP:POLITIAN says no local politicians so those opinions and coverage shouldn’t count. ~2026-45286-26 (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- WP:POLITICIAN doesn't say that you need sources that discuss a person outside politics. That notability guideline just says that a person isn't presumed to be notable just because they are involved in local politics (state-level politicians, by contrast, are presumed to be notable). Indeed, the whole point is that a local politician can be notable per WP:N and WP:SIGCOV if they have "received significant press coverage" of their work in local politics. And that's exactly the case with Torosis. Here are a few examples of the significant coverage (all of these are cited in her article):
- Can you point to the articles of significant coverage that cover her life or activities outside being a city council or rent control board member? I couldn’t find anything but city council coverage and WP:POLITIAN says no local politicians so those opinions and coverage shouldn’t count. ~2026-45286-26 (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2026 (UTC)
- Canyon News (full profile)
- MSN (full article discussing her and councilmember Jesse Zwick)
- Fox News (full article discussing her and the mayoral transition)
- Santa Monica Daily Press (full profile)
- Santa Monica Daily Press (an earlier profile of her and another commissioner when she was on the Santa Monica Rent Board)
- Another Santa Monica Daily Press profile (this one about her 2026 state of the city address)
- Los Angeles Business Journal (short profile)
- Patch News (several paragraphs profiling Torosis)
- Santa Monica Lookout (profile comparing Torosis to prior mayor)
- I think all these sources satisfy the WP:100WORDS principle. A google search will show other examples. The text in footnote 8 in the guidelines for local politicians in WP:POLITICIAN says gives an example of a local politician who meets the WP:N: "A politician who has received 'significant press coverage' has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists." The articles cited above show that Caroline Torosis clearly meets this standard. Notecardforfree (talk) 04:39, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: The sources presented above do not resolve the general notability issue. Most are local reports about Torosis becoming mayor for a one-year term—the same type of routine transition announcement published whenever Santa Monica installs a new mayor. Although being local does not automatically disqualify a source, these articles principally verify her title and succession; they do not provide the substantial, subject-focused analysis required to demonstrate significant coverage. Routine announcements, brief mentions, quotations, awards, and coverage of City Council actions are not equivalent to in-depth coverage of Torosis herself.
- MSN item does not constitute an additional independent source because it is a republication of an article from the Westside Current, a small local publication. Republishing the same underlying reporting does not create a second independent source for the purpose of establishing notability. The only clearly substantial coverage centered on Torosis appears to concern the Ocean Avenue housing controversy and questions about her prior knowledge—yet that controversy is largely absent from the article. Even that coverage is associated with a single local controversy rather than sustained, independent coverage of her broader career. The sources presented establish that she holds local office, but they do not establish standalone biographical notability under the general notability guideline or the notability guideline for politicians. Delete or redirect to Santa Monica City Council or MERGE to a page about the position of Mayor of Santa Monica would be more appropriate in my opinion but I’m not voting. ~2026-45658-57 (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: The quality of those sources, and the level of coverage they provide, is typical of virtually any mayor of a city with a population of more than 50,000 almost anywhere in America. My read of these deletion discussions is that we've been very careful about extending too far into municipal officials because there are just so many of them, and very, very few of them attract meaningful coverage. I am still voting to delete. PA Uploader (talk) 19:33, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Honorary position, local coverage, only additional notability is locally covered scandals having to do with her position on the city council. ~2026-45658-57 (talk) 21:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Reply to IP 2026-45658-57 and @PA Uploader:: The sources cited above (and the sources cited in the article) very clearly discuss a range of topics related to Torosis’ tenure as mayor. They are not just routine announcements. The sources show that she has been
“written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists”
(quoting WP:POLITICIAN). Indeed, they discuss in depth her policies, goals, experiences, history, and future ambitions. This establishes notability per WP:POLITICIAN and WP:SIGCOV. It sounds like you both would like a more restrictive notability standard for local politicians, and that’s fine, but that discussion should be had at the WP:BIO talkpage, not here.
- Reply to IP 2026-45658-57 and @PA Uploader:: The sources cited above (and the sources cited in the article) very clearly discuss a range of topics related to Torosis’ tenure as mayor. They are not just routine announcements. The sources show that she has been
- Comment: The quality of those sources, and the level of coverage they provide, is typical of virtually any mayor of a city with a population of more than 50,000 almost anywhere in America. My read of these deletion discussions is that we've been very careful about extending too far into municipal officials because there are just so many of them, and very, very few of them attract meaningful coverage. I am still voting to delete. PA Uploader (talk) 19:33, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- There are hundreds of Wikipedia articles about politicians with similar (and in some cases much less) coverage from comparable cities. Check out "Category:California city council members." To give just a handful of specific examples, see Konstantine Anthony (Burbank); Bill Cole (Montana politician) (Billings, MT); Victor Gordo (Pasadena); Adena Ishii (Berkeley); Eduardo Martinez (politician) (Richmond); Sharona Nazarian (Beverly Hills); Will O'Neill (politician) (Newport Beach); Skylar Peak (Malibu); Eric J. Perrodin (Compton); Albert Robles (Carson); Helene Schneider (Santa Barbara); Danny Tabor (Inglewood); and others. Again, if you want to change the notability guidelines for local politicians, let’s have that discussion on that talk page. But the evidence clearly shows that Torosis’ article meets the existing standard to keep it. Notecardforfree (talk) 23:04, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
- Follow up note: Since my last reply, I've added additional sources to the article that provide additional coverage and discussion of Torosis' work. I've been editing Wikipedia for nearly two decades, and I don't think I've seen a subject with this much coverage be deleted for failing WP:GNG. Notecardforfree (talk) 01:32, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I think this is just case of .WP:TOOSOON. If you have been editing for so long you would know that other pages do not prove notability and it’s incorrect to reference them in AfD. Your additions only confirm that you can only find extremely local sources which barely mention her at all and I found at least one stuffed in there from the Santa Monica Lookout that didn’t have any mentions at all. If you can find find articles outside of her one year ceremonial ascension to mayor, outside our very local press, which she is the focus of or covered in detail, I would be happy to look. The place to put you references is here so the editors do not have to search for them. I tried to add some content about the independent press outside her ascension to mayor and you promptly decided to re-edit it as if you were part of her PR team, which take me think you might have a connection? Also, this was created literally the day she could call herself mayor which should be considered imo. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't create this article (and I don't know who did). And no, I'm not on her PR team or anything like that. The COI banner that you put on the page is unwarranted. But I do have an academic/intellectual interest in California politics, and want to make sure our coverage of all California politicians is fair and balanced. I did some cleanup in this article earlier this year because it was extremely biased against her (in fact, it felt like the person who created the article wanted to use it as a platform to criticize her). The content you added about the Ocean Avenue project was not in line with WP:BLP and WP:WEIGHT, so I took the initiative to revise it. As for whether the subject of this article meets the notability guidelines, I don't think you and I are going to reach agreement on this. I've explained my reasons, and you've explained yours. I respectfully disagree, but we'll need to let this AFD process play out. Notecardforfree (talk) 03:46, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I did not intend to make it "biased" against her, however I tend to be blunt in my wording.
- From my quick google search while looking for sources
- There was notability.
- She was mayor.
- She had a controversy.
- And then leave the rest to anyone else who may want to edit. DarmaniLink (talk) 14:54, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, I included the controversy bit because not saying something because it's bad is effectively a WP:NPOV vio DarmaniLink (talk) 16:09, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- Note: DarmaniLink is the creator of the article. --ABx11 (she/they) 06:15, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I didn’t blame her directly for the page creation, I just said it should be noted. To me this last rewrite confirms this is just local political advertising and reference stuffing to promote her local political reelection to the city council, if she shouldn’t have a page since most other mayor’s have not gotten one without significant contributions outside of the position, it gives her an unfair advantage against other opponents. WP:POLITICIAN should be applied since her page is all local politics and press.. one big extra thing to consider, this is a ceremonial position for a year, that is why there is no election or real policy coverage outside the city council. In fact, as Mayor she isn’t even allowed to direct city employees, the city council votes and the city manager disperses commands. It’s WP:ADVERTISING at this point.. there certainly seems to be a COI as well given the recent changes to the article. Also stuffing the alpage with articles that do nothing but quote the “mayor” does not meet the in depth coverage requirements outside routine city events. Now this article is filled with tons of political quotes stuffed in to make it look credible.. it’s all very local and PROMO.Has anyone been able to identify and in depth coverage outside her ceremonial ascension to mayor for the year? ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 06:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- Reply to anon: To be clear, WP:POLITICIAN says that you can be notable for being a local politician (like a mayor). The WP:SIGCOV of Torosis’ mayorship satisfies WP:N. In any event, you’ve asked for sources that discuss torosis outside her ascension to the mayorship. Here’s a partial list:
- Coverage of her work on the rent board before being elected
- Coverage of her work on the rent board in 2022
- 2023 Coverage of her work on council shortly after being elected
- Coverage of her receiving the Just City Mayoral Fellowship at Harvard
- Short coverage in her selection for 500 most influential people in LA
- Coverage about her and the Ocean Ave housing project here and here
- Coverage of her work on economic development and other things
- Interview with Torosis about her restorative justice work
- And, again, I don’t think you and I are going to agree about whether this article should be deleted or not. We’ll need to leave that to whomever has the fun task of closing this discussion. Notecardforfree (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: Thank you for providing the specific links. I agree that coverage does not have to concern activities outside politics, and a source is not disqualified merely because it is local. The question under the basic biographical notability criteria and the general notability guideline, however, is whether the subject has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are intellectually independent of one another and independent of the subject.
- Examined individually, most of these links do not meet that standard:
- The 2020 Santa Monica Daily Press article is a joint post-election policy article about Torosis and Anastasia Foster. It quotes both officials but is not an in-depth profile of Torosis.
- The 2022 Santa Monica Lookout article is about a proposed charter amendment. Torosis appears as one Rent Control Board member advocating the proposal; the article covers the Board’s action, not Torosis herself.
- The 2023 Santa Monica Daily Press article is the strongest pre-mayoral example, but it is still a joint “first 100 days” interview with Jesse Zwick, much of which consists of the officials’ own statements. It does not constitute multiple independent coverage by itself.
- The fellowship article is a selection announcement, while the Los Angeles Business Journal item is a brief staff-authored list entry. The “one hundred words” page is an essay, not a notability guideline. The essay itself acknowledges that reaching a particular word count does not establish significant coverage when the material is off-topic or is not genuinely secondary coverage.
- The two Ocean Avenue articles are the clearest subject-focused coverage, but both were written by the same reporter for the same publication about successive developments in one local controversy. They form a single coverage cluster, not sustained, intellectually independent coverage of Torosis’s broader career.
- The State of the City article covers a civic event and largely summarizes Torosis’s official speech. The KCRW report is about Santa Monica’s restorative-justice fund and uses Torosis as an official source; it is not a profile of her.
- Thus, this list does not demonstrate “multiple news feature articles” providing sustained biographical coverage as claimed. At most, it identifies one joint interview and one substantial single-controversy coverage cluster, surrounded by routine reporting about governmental actions, a selection announcement, a list entry, a speech and an official interview.
- These sources verify her public activities, but the notability guideline for politicians expressly states that being an elected local official does not guarantee notability. Given that the Santa Monica mayoralty is a rotating council position without independent executive authority, I still do not see the depth and breadth of independent coverage needed for a standalone biography.delete, redirect to city council page or merge to article about position of mayor of Santa Monica remain the more appropriate outcome. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
- Anon, I'm not going to be able to convince you, but take a look at the source assessment chart I added below. Notecardforfree (talk) 10:56, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- Reply to anon: To be clear, WP:POLITICIAN says that you can be notable for being a local politician (like a mayor). The WP:SIGCOV of Torosis’ mayorship satisfies WP:N. In any event, you’ve asked for sources that discuss torosis outside her ascension to the mayorship. Here’s a partial list:
- I didn’t blame her directly for the page creation, I just said it should be noted. To me this last rewrite confirms this is just local political advertising and reference stuffing to promote her local political reelection to the city council, if she shouldn’t have a page since most other mayor’s have not gotten one without significant contributions outside of the position, it gives her an unfair advantage against other opponents. WP:POLITICIAN should be applied since her page is all local politics and press.. one big extra thing to consider, this is a ceremonial position for a year, that is why there is no election or real policy coverage outside the city council. In fact, as Mayor she isn’t even allowed to direct city employees, the city council votes and the city manager disperses commands. It’s WP:ADVERTISING at this point.. there certainly seems to be a COI as well given the recent changes to the article. Also stuffing the alpage with articles that do nothing but quote the “mayor” does not meet the in depth coverage requirements outside routine city events. Now this article is filled with tons of political quotes stuffed in to make it look credible.. it’s all very local and PROMO.Has anyone been able to identify and in depth coverage outside her ceremonial ascension to mayor for the year? ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 06:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't create this article (and I don't know who did). And no, I'm not on her PR team or anything like that. The COI banner that you put on the page is unwarranted. But I do have an academic/intellectual interest in California politics, and want to make sure our coverage of all California politicians is fair and balanced. I did some cleanup in this article earlier this year because it was extremely biased against her (in fact, it felt like the person who created the article wanted to use it as a platform to criticize her). The content you added about the Ocean Avenue project was not in line with WP:BLP and WP:WEIGHT, so I took the initiative to revise it. As for whether the subject of this article meets the notability guidelines, I don't think you and I are going to reach agreement on this. I've explained my reasons, and you've explained yours. I respectfully disagree, but we'll need to let this AFD process play out. Notecardforfree (talk) 03:46, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- I think this is just case of .WP:TOOSOON. If you have been editing for so long you would know that other pages do not prove notability and it’s incorrect to reference them in AfD. Your additions only confirm that you can only find extremely local sources which barely mention her at all and I found at least one stuffed in there from the Santa Monica Lookout that didn’t have any mentions at all. If you can find find articles outside of her one year ceremonial ascension to mayor, outside our very local press, which she is the focus of or covered in detail, I would be happy to look. The place to put you references is here so the editors do not have to search for them. I tried to add some content about the independent press outside her ascension to mayor and you promptly decided to re-edit it as if you were part of her PR team, which take me think you might have a connection? Also, this was created literally the day she could call herself mayor which should be considered imo. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
- Follow up note: Since my last reply, I've added additional sources to the article that provide additional coverage and discussion of Torosis' work. I've been editing Wikipedia for nearly two decades, and I don't think I've seen a subject with this much coverage be deleted for failing WP:GNG. Notecardforfree (talk) 01:32, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Appears to be echoing a press release from the city government |
No editor staff listing |
~ ~100 words, has a few facts, borderline significant coverage | ✘ No | |
| No byline, no masthead, no editorial policy |
✘ No | |||
 After removing the quotes, there is some secondary coverage |
|
~ After removing the quotes, 200 words of significant coverage | ~ Maybe | |
| ~ Has a policies and standards page. Ownership or editorial staff unclear. Articles have bylines. | The article is mainly about an award, with no |
✘ No | ||
| ~ The article subject is an interview subject and there is not much secondary analysis | ~ Has a policies and standards page. Ownership or editorial staff unclear. Articles have bylines. | The one fact: the subject favors rent control |
✘ No | |
| Exclusively primary coverage, extensively quotes what the subject said without providing secondary analysis |
~ | ✘ No | ||
| ~ 121 words of coverage. It's from a "top 500" list so discount | ? Unknown | |||
| Not even WP:100WORDS |
✘ No | |||
| No editorial masthead, very unclear about quality |
Very rudimentary coverage where the bulk of the content is in quotes. It lists election dates and summarizes the subject's style in one line. |
✘ No | ||
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. | ||||
- Delete: I took a look at the sources provided by Notecardforfree and I don't think there's enough here. Many of the sources themselves are of suspect quality; the coverage is barebones and relies heavily on quotes and primary sources. I looked on Newspapers.com and there are some quotes in the LA Times, but no significant coverage. I don't think the subject meets the bar. 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 03:48, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- @PacificDepths: Regarding the Santa Monica Daily Press, my research has shown that it is a respected independent newspaper with significant circulation (certainly on par with other sources that are routinely considered reliable). You can read more about the newspaper here: . You can find their masthead on the PDF version of their newspaper. Here’s the August 20, 2026 edition, and you can find the masthead on the right-hand side on page 3: . According to its masthead, the Daily Press is a National Newspaper Association award winner. As I mentioned much earlier in this discussion, in the news landscape of California and Los Angeles, reporting from papers like the Daily Press fills the gaps left by papers like the LA Times.
- I think we’ll have to agree to disagree about the assessment of some of the sources in your table. The Fox 11 one and the Daily Press’ “Rent Control Talks Shop” very clearly meet the coverage standards per WP:BASIC. In the Daily Press article, the author talks about Torosis’ perspectives on statewide efforts to implement rent control, market factors that were impacting Torosis’ work on the rent board, and trends in voter support in Santa Monica. The article about the fellowship also provides several paragraphs of coverage of Torosis’ goals and priorities as mayor and how those relate to the fellowship program (see also Footnote 7 in WP:BASIC, which compares substantial and trivial coverage).
- Your chart also left out other important sources that also show that this article meets the standard of WP:BASIC, WP:SIGCOV, and WP:POLITICIAN. There’s the 2023 Coverage of her work on council shortly after being elected ; coverage about her and the Ocean Ave housing project here and here ; coverage about her efforts to study a fair work week law ; coverage from the LA Times about the work that Torosis and her city council colleagues are doing to turn around the city ; this LA Times article about Torosis’ vision for revitalizing the city through big events ; and other sources cited in the article
- Here’s my “rebuttal” source assessment, which I’ve limited to nine sources that I think very clearly meet the WP:SIGCOV standard:
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
The entire article is about Torosis’ ascension to the mayorship and the circumstances surrounding that event |
✔ Yes | |
| see |
|
The article talks about Torosis’ perspectives on statewide efforts to implement rent control, market factors that were impacting Torosis’ work on the rent board, and trends in voter support in Santa Monica. |
✔ Yes | |
| see |
|
Several paragraphs of coverage of Torosis’ goals and priorities as mayor and how those relate to the fellowship program |
✔ Yes | |
| see |
|
Several paragraphs of commentary on the challenges faced by Torosis and her colleagues on the council |
✔ Yes | |
| see |
|
The entire article is about Torosis and her potential knowledge of the Ocean Avenue housing project |
✔ Yes | |
|
|
The entire article is about Torosis and her potential knowledge of the Ocean Avenue housing project |
✔ Yes | |
|
|
The entire article is about the work that Torosis and her city council colleagues are doing to jumpstart the city’s economy |
✔ Yes | |
|
|
About 200 words of analysis (excluding quotations) discussing Santa Monica’s strategy, how that aligns with Torosis’ policy goals, and her plans for capitalizing on big events in the future |
✔ Yes | |
|
|
It’s short, and I know it’s from a “top 500” list, but the biographical information here is presumably vetted by the LA Business Journal’s editorial team |
✔ Yes | |
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. | ||||
- While I think we clearly have enough sources here to satisfy WP:SIGCOV, I’ll also remind everyone that WP:BASIC also contemplates that a wide breadth of less-substantial coverage can also satisfy the notability criteria:
“If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability”
. I encourage readers to look at both the depth and breadth of coverage in the sources cited in the article. Notecardforfree (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- While I think we clearly have enough sources here to satisfy WP:SIGCOV, I’ll also remind everyone that WP:BASIC also contemplates that a wide breadth of less-substantial coverage can also satisfy the notability criteria:
- Delete I am convinced by the source evaluation table presented by Pacific Depths, that the subject does not meet our standards for notability. While stand alone pages about local elected officials are contemplated by NPOL, the standard for local elected officials usually requires analysis of their work:
A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists
. This frequently revolves around retrospectives of what the officeholder accomplished in office, but could also mean national or international profiles (especially for local elected officials representing smaller jurisdictions [but size of jurisdiction is not mentioned in our guidelines]). There is no city council page or list of mayors to redirect to, so this should be deleted rather than redirected. --Enos733 (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- @Enos733: What did you think of my response to Pacific Depths? I noted that Pacific Depths' source assessment left out key sources (which are summarized in my rebuttal table), and Pacific Depths did not count any sources from the Santa Monica Daily Press (which I also addressed in my response). I will also note that the subject just needs to meet WP:BASIC. There is no requirement for retrospective coverage, and there is no requirement for national or international coverage. Notecardforfree (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
- I read your source analysis before commenting, and I do not change my opinion. While it is true that WP:BASIC does contemplate
less-substantial coverage can also satisfying the notability criteria
, I feel it is a weak position to hold on to. Fundamentally, the questions I usually have for local elected officials is 1) why is this person important for a stand-alone page in an international encyclopedia and 2) to what degree is the person extraordinary compared to all other similar elected officials? So, I see a mayor in a city-manager form of government whose coverage largely is about plans (that the subject cannot enact unilaterally). And then I look at other existing pages of Santa Monica mayors and see that most do not have stand-alone pages. While this is not an "other pages exist" argument, it raises the question to me of whether there is something about being the mayor of Santa Monica that means a page should be created. In this case very few Santa Monica mayors have stand-alone pages, which again to me suggests we should be looking for national coverage, or coverage that is above the norm (as opposed to routine coverage). Cobbling together a few bits of information from a variety of articles doesn't get to notability (for me at least). - Enos733 (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2026 (UTC)- Just to clarify because you mentioned elected above, The mayor position is ceremonial, given to a new city council member each year. Local papers will cover it every year, for every mayor, as they did for the previous mayors. The city council is a very part time position that pays $18k a year. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 00:36, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- We could always make articles for the other mayors, most of them are redlinked DarmaniLink (talk) 14:03, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- I read your source analysis before commenting, and I do not change my opinion. While it is true that WP:BASIC does contemplate
- @Enos733: What did you think of my response to Pacific Depths? I noted that Pacific Depths' source assessment left out key sources (which are summarized in my rebuttal table), and Pacific Depths did not count any sources from the Santa Monica Daily Press (which I also addressed in my response). I will also note that the subject just needs to meet WP:BASIC. There is no requirement for retrospective coverage, and there is no requirement for national or international coverage. Notecardforfree (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
Keep I looked up Caroline Torosis on google to learn more about her campaign. I found her Wiki and I found the Article for Deletion about her Wiki. I read the List of policies and guidelines for deletion debates. There's significant press coverage. The article isn't low quality. Don't delete it. Maybe politician Wikis should need special rules when there is an election. --Signed ~2026-46396-59 (talk) 17:30, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - Wikipedia:POLITICIAN directly handles rules for politicians and no one is saying the article is of low written quality, in fact I am impressed at the editors ability to extract nearly every quote ever published as a local city council person and turn it into a substantially wordy page mentioning every political opinion.Unfortunately, in 3 months she is no longer the ceremonial mayor and if she is reelected, she would return to being one of seven local city council people. Taking advantage of creative writing and extremely local coverage doesnt meet Wikipedia’s criteria for notability. Remember votes don’t exclusively determine the outcome of AfD, it relies around the strength of the arguments within the discussion. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 18:28, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
Keep: I agree with Cullen328. Santa Monica is a large enough city and she has had enough WP:SUSTAINED coverage to pass under the GNG even though she does not meet an automatic inclusion guideline in NPOL. Promotional language should be cleaned up. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this is heading for a no consensus, but let's give it another week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:08, 26 August 2026 (UTC)- Keep: Santa Monica is a large city, several former mayors have pages that aren't flagged for removal. See Kevin McKeown (politician) There is also significant additional information that can be added to this article if it isn't deleted, like Torosis involvement with the Ebony Beach Club reparations project that was covered in multiple articles. She seems much more noteworthy than several other politicians with dedicated pages. It's also probably worth mentioning the initial article seems to have clearly been written as a sort of political hit piece. It mirrored the writing of an anonymous mail campaign (that seemingly violates several political mailer and campaign laws) and is supposedly being investigated by the postal service for use of a fraudulent return address. To the extent maintaining the current page discourages a repeat of the initial attack piece I'd also recommend it as a "keep". Josiah Blessed (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC)— Josiah Blessed (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- There are no article on the Keven McKeown page that meet the requirements that I saw initially. That page should possibly be added for an AfD discussion. Looking at the coverage of the last Mayor, Lana Negrete reveals almost exactly the same type of political coverage with minor differences based on the issues of their term. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 03:02, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- I object to the phrasing of attack piece. Not saying something because it's bad press for them is a form of bias in its own right. I wrote what I found and what sources there. DarmaniLink (talk) 20:06, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
- Keep in mind as well there are significantly more sources now than there were before as well, given she had just become mayor. I attributed every single claim to the source which said such, with leading attribution. DarmaniLink (talk) 20:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
- Comment for closing Admin I would be suspect of the flurry off keep votes and examine their history as one account was created specifically for this vote, one is anonymous and the others screen name suggests they might have a connection to the subject. Either way, together as a whole they look suspicious and perhaps checking the substance of the accounts on the delete side might reveal more established editors who participate in AfD. While I might be commenting, as an anon I am not actually submitting a vote. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 02:58, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- Keep: Santa Monica is a large city, several former mayors have pages that aren't flagged for removal. See Kevin McKeown (politician) There is also significant additional information that can be added to this article if it isn't deleted, like Torosis involvement with the Ebony Beach Club reparations project that was covered in multiple articles. She seems much more noteworthy than several other politicians with dedicated pages. It's also probably worth mentioning the initial article seems to have clearly been written as a sort of political hit piece. It mirrored the writing of an anonymous mail campaign (that seemingly violates several political mailer and campaign laws) and is supposedly being investigated by the postal service for use of a fraudulent return address. To the extent maintaining the current page discourages a repeat of the initial attack piece I'd also recommend it as a "keep". Josiah Blessed (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC)— Josiah Blessed (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Delete per the cogent source analysis by PacificDepths. Further, historically we discredit coverage of mayors that is local at AFD as counting toward GNG. We would need to see coverage at the regional (ie not in the Santa Monica/ Los Angeles media market) to demonstrate notability in this case in the spirit of WP:NPOL. That just doesn't exist here. I note that some of the other Santa Monica mayor articles should probably be deleted as well.4meter4 (talk) 03:24, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- @4meter4: I don't think that's an accurate characterization of past AFD discussions for local politicians, and it certainly isn't the standard that's required by WP:BASIC and WP:NPOL. In fact, there was a recent discussion at WT:BIO, and the consensus was to not require coverage in regional (or state or national) sources. The discussion recognized that local sources play an important role in covering local politics in the modern media landscape, and all sources would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (see WP:SIGCOV). Take a look at my response chart and the sources cited in the article. There is in-depth coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources. This article very clearly passes WP:BASIC and WP:NPOL. Notecardforfree (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- I've been an AFD patroller since before 2010. It is absolutely common interpretive practice at AFD. The consensus has long been that local coverage of local politics is WP:ROUTINE and falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Any coverage in local media of a sitting mayor or someone running for mayor is not usable towards WP:SIGCOV because of WP:NOTNEWS. We've always approached mayors in this way. You need to show coverage beyond the local to meet WP:GNG. Otherwise we would have articles on every mayor in the history of the country, because little town papers cover their mayors routinely. The Barnsdall Daily and later The Bigheart Times covers its local mayor in Barnsdall, Oklahoma, but we would never accept an article on a mayor based just those local papers. The only fair way to approach local politicians consistently is to require media coverage beyond the local, which is why usually only mayors from very large cities have pages because they often attract press from beyond the immediate region. 4meter4 (talk) 15:51, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- I have also been following AFD discussions for local politicians since the 2000s. It's always been my experience that sourcing is evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and unless I'm missing something, regional (or national) coverage has never been a requirement for WP:BASIC or WP:NPOL. One common issue in these AFD discussions is that small, local sources can sometimes lack the editorial standards per WP:RS, but see my comments above about the Santa Monica Daily Press. It's a respected publication that has filled important gaps in coverage from larger media outlets. If you think WP:BASIC should require regional or national coverage, then I think that's a discussion we can have at that talkpage, but it's not the standard that exists now, and it's not the standard that I've seen in AFD discussions. Notecardforfree (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - again, the office she was elected to is a city council person (1 of 7), the mayor position is a one year honorary position bestowed upon a different city council member who hasn’t been mayor already, each year, making this argument less relevant IMHO. Do all 7 council persons deserve pages? ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 16:21, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- If they meet WP:BASIC, then yes, they do. WP:NPOL doesn't make distinctions between mayors, councilmembers, or really any titles of local politicians. Notecardforfree (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- Even WP:Basic requires significant coverage in multiple independent sources. Local coverage of city events is routine, and as stated above by an extremely experienced editor, lacks sufficient evidence of notability for a stand alone article. Since she is essentially a city council member, virtually all the coverage is either routine and offered to every honorary mayor of the city or about unilateral actions by the city council. Even if there is a small amount of local coverage analysis, not sure there is but, if there is, it is mostly about local city financing or political decisions, making much more routine for small local papers that need to cover all city events to have enough content to publish daily editions. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- Anon, can you cite any policies or guidelines that support your assertion that
"local coverage of city events is routine"
? As far as I'm aware, in my two decades of editing Wikipedia, that's never been the standard. While WP:ROUTINE sets parameters for events (not people), it provides some helpful context. Local coverage of local politics is not the type of "run of the mill""wedding announcements, sports scores, crime logs"
that would be considered "routine coverage." Again, sources need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Notecardforfree (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2026 (UTC)- A yearly ascension to honorary mayor of a city under 100k is a routine event, the coverage associated with it is local and routine. I would defer to 4meter4’s analogy of notability on Barnsdall Oklahoma, with a note the Barnsdall probably elects their mayor. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 17:41, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- I also want to say, I think the current version of the draft violates Wikipedia:Biographies of living people by including original research. In an attempt to reference stuff the article you have included quotes and made statements about political positions held by the city council person which were no covered in the article, starting with the statement that “she has backed affordable housing”, the article covers a single affordable housing decision and does not cover any other history of her’s about affordable housing.. can I ask what your attachment is to the subject? You seem determined to justify keeping the article which you didn’t even create? Do you have a relationship with Torosis to disclose? ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 17:46, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- Anon, I don't think I'm going to convince you. I've shown that the article meets WP:BASIC. The closing admin can sort out whether there is consensus to support either of our positions. As for the content of the article, I've done my best to present a factual and neutral account of what the sources say. If you disagree, we should discuss on the article's talkpage. And, no, I don't have a relationship with the subject of the article. I have an academic interest in California politics (including local politics), and I took a particular interest in this article when I saw the original version, which I tried to improve (per WP:BLP). As is true with many articles I've worked on, I've done a "deep dive" into the available sources, and it seems to me that some editors are determined to either delete this page or to use the article as a forum to criticize Torosis. I would be in favor of stricter protections for articles about politicians running in an election, and perhaps we should discuss that elsewhere. Notecardforfree (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- Anon, can you cite any policies or guidelines that support your assertion that
- Even WP:Basic requires significant coverage in multiple independent sources. Local coverage of city events is routine, and as stated above by an extremely experienced editor, lacks sufficient evidence of notability for a stand alone article. Since she is essentially a city council member, virtually all the coverage is either routine and offered to every honorary mayor of the city or about unilateral actions by the city council. Even if there is a small amount of local coverage analysis, not sure there is but, if there is, it is mostly about local city financing or political decisions, making much more routine for small local papers that need to cover all city events to have enough content to publish daily editions. ~2026-45967-23 (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- If they meet WP:BASIC, then yes, they do. WP:NPOL doesn't make distinctions between mayors, councilmembers, or really any titles of local politicians. Notecardforfree (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- I've been an AFD patroller since before 2010. It is absolutely common interpretive practice at AFD. The consensus has long been that local coverage of local politics is WP:ROUTINE and falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Any coverage in local media of a sitting mayor or someone running for mayor is not usable towards WP:SIGCOV because of WP:NOTNEWS. We've always approached mayors in this way. You need to show coverage beyond the local to meet WP:GNG. Otherwise we would have articles on every mayor in the history of the country, because little town papers cover their mayors routinely. The Barnsdall Daily and later The Bigheart Times covers its local mayor in Barnsdall, Oklahoma, but we would never accept an article on a mayor based just those local papers. The only fair way to approach local politicians consistently is to require media coverage beyond the local, which is why usually only mayors from very large cities have pages because they often attract press from beyond the immediate region. 4meter4 (talk) 15:51, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- @4meter4: I don't think that's an accurate characterization of past AFD discussions for local politicians, and it certainly isn't the standard that's required by WP:BASIC and WP:NPOL. In fact, there was a recent discussion at WT:BIO, and the consensus was to not require coverage in regional (or state or national) sources. The discussion recognized that local sources play an important role in covering local politics in the modern media landscape, and all sources would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (see WP:SIGCOV). Take a look at my response chart and the sources cited in the article. There is in-depth coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources. This article very clearly passes WP:BASIC and WP:NPOL. Notecardforfree (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2026 (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.