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 keep. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Acting (law) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has no sources and honestly isn't encyclopedic - it's more suited for Wikitionary. It also assumes that "acting" exclusively refers to legal contexts (acting prime minister etc), where it could actually also refer to business - acting CEO etc ItsPugle (talk) 04:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per this massive article in one of the most prominent US law reviews:

O'Connell, Anne Joseph (2020). "Actings". Columbia Law Review. 120 (3): 613–728. doi:10.2307/26910475. ISSN 0010-1958. JSTOR 26910475.

See also:

• Denning, Brannon P. (1998). "Article II, the Vacancies Act and the Appointment of "Acting" Executive Branch Officials". Washington University Law Review. 76 (3): 1039–1065. ISSN 2166-7993.
• Tackett, Michael (2019-04-08). "Another Day, Another 'Acting' Cabinet Secretary as Trump Skirts Senate". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331.
• Baude, William (2018-11-10). "Who Is Lawfully the Attorney General Right Now?". The Volokh Conspiracy.

Agree that this article is in quite poor shape, but that's not in itself a reason for deletion. As for the fact that it doesn't address "acting" status in other contexts, I would note that the title is "Acting (law)", so the article is restricted by its terms to discussion of the legal context—which is a distinctive and noteworthy context in its own right. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 13:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Completely pointless dicdef. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Wikipedia is not a dictionary. — Tartan357  ^(Talk) 04:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: It's true that Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, but "acting" positions in politics are pretty common and, per Aleatory's sources, is independently covered. HumanxAnthro (talk) 11:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: All very interesting but this is a definition, pure and simple, and has no place here. asnac (talk) 13:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you use the sources such as the ones brought up by Aleatory, it'll be far more than just a definition article. HumanxAnthro (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't think this is merely a dictionary definition; the article attempts to describe/explain a concept (currently a legal one, but this could/should be expanded to operational etc. areas), or at least has the potential to be developed in that direction. And adding the sources mentioned by AleatoryPonderings could take care of the other problem, of being unreferenced. All in all, quite a useful little article IMO, and it would be a pity to get rid of it just because it ATM may be borderline dictionary-ish. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per AleatoryPonderings, this is a notable topic and a proper version of the article would have a lot more than just a dictionary definition. Umimmak (talk) 19:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The nomination reflects a misapprehension that an "acting" CEO or the like is not covered by this article, but the legal sense of "acting" covers all positions for which a person can have "acting" authority. BD2412 T 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added some content. BD2412 T 04:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • As have I—hopefully these contribs address some of the concerns raised above. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEYMAN and WP:GNG. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:HEY and AleatoryPondering's improvements. -- Toughpigs (talk) 15:19, 28 July 2020 (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.