Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Víctor M. Marroquín

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Víctor M. Marroquín

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

There are multiple assertions of notability in the edit summaries, but after many years no one has been able to add multiple citations to independent reliable sources. I have been unable to find anything myself. Maybe there are Spanish language sources. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There's no indication that Marroquín satisfies WP:BIO, or even WP:PROF. I've tried find sources which might help better establish notability, but have not had any luck at all. I was able to find elcomercio.pe/politica/actualidad/victor-marroquin-congreso-unicameral-parche-noticia-1959203, but it's an interview so it's not really sufficient for establishing notability. I've posted about the article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peru#Víctor M. Marroquín, but have not gotten a response. I started a discussion about the article at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive250#Víctor M. Marroquín, but that thread was archived without anything being resolved. I've also asked about it at User talk:Tokyogirl79/Archive 31#Víctor M. Marroquín where it was suggested by DGG that the article needed to be sorted out at AfD. Much of the content is being added/removed by IPs who may be trying to portray the subject in a particular light, either negatively of positively. (See this, this, this, and this Teahouse post for examples of these edits/comments). There is also this edit sum here which might not technically be a legal threat but does seem to be moving in that general direction by calling for an (legal) investigtion into the reasons a Template:Notability was added. Anyway, none of this is, of course, a reason to delete, which is why I've continued to look for better sources. I'm just not sure now whether such sources exist at all. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 03:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete none of his positions or awards are such to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (provisional). I can't see notability at present but could change my mind. Legal threats are a worry. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:33, 26 February 2017 (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.