Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberto Parra Vallette

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. I find the arguments on the Keep side to be P&G-light. For a BLP, this lands us on the Delete side. Owen× ☎ 13:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Parra Vallette

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Chile. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Does not fail NPOL, as the mayor of a large city in Chile (Viña del Mar). He did so in full capacity following the removal of office of Rodrigo González, who preceded him. Although he was the mayor for only three months, the article could well be expanded using offline sources such as El Mercurio de Valparaíso. --Bedivere (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but 334,248 is not large enough to entitle the mayors to be inherently notable. Let's be consistent with our judgments. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's put that into perspective then. It's the sixth largest commune in Chile by population. It's a large city in Chile. Bedivere (talk) 03:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Population doesn't mean high notability. Honolulu has a population of 344,967. Viña del Mar has more population than Orlando, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Des Moines and Anchorage, notable U.S. cities. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:23, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And in every one of those cities, a mayor would still have to be properly sourced to get their own article, and would still not be handed an automatic notability freebie on bad sourcing just because they existed as a mayor. Bearcat (talk) 16:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets enough NPOL, the subject of the biography has held an official position and has received sufficient media coverage. --Carigval.97 (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NPOL is not about holding "an official position". Geschichte (talk) 20:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A mayor doesn't get an automatic notability freebie just because of the population of the city — the notability of a mayor hinges on the quality and depth and volume of WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources that can be shown to support an article with. But this is referenced almost entirely to primary sources, such as directory entries and raw tables of election results and simple certifications of his election victories, which are not support for notability — and of the just two footnotes that come from reliable sources, one is a dead link and the other one is just covering him in the context of his candidacy in a much later non-mayoral election that he didn't win, and thus isn't supporting notability as a mayor. Obviously he could keep an article that was referenced properly, but the fact that his city has 334,248 people living in it does not magically exempt him from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the thing is that most news sources that could eventually support this article are offline. I'm sure lots of references could be retrieved from regional newspapers like El Mercurio de Valparaíso and La Estrella de Valparaíso. There is a Santiago Mercurio archive online but is only available to subscribers, a source which could eventually serve here. La Tercera and El Mostrador had online versions in 2000 and probably could be at least partially available on the Wayback Machine. The purpose of this comment is to show this could be further expanded and referenced with reliable sources but would need some effort gathering the sources. Bedivere (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage of a three-month mayoral spell? Geschichte (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, for sure, it's not a common event to have a mayor replaced in Chile. Their tenure was short but it certainly was covered by major national and regional sources.

Now, leaving that aside, there are some book sources that could be used to further expand the article. The Tributo a Valparaíso (Fernando Vergara Benítez, 2007) (partially available on Google Books) mentions the "tireless work by former mayor of Viña del Mar and social assistant, Mr. Roberto Parra Vallette, a pioneer in Chile, dedicated with his family for more than two decades to the rehabilitation of drug addicts, founding in 1982 (or 1983?) the Casa de Acogida Hogar La Roca" (p. 34). An article, from 2000, mentions him in this 2000 magazine, but the article is not completely visible. There is this El Mercurio article (Chilean newspaper of record) mentioning his election as mayor in an extraordinary city council session. There is an in-depth article by CNN, dated 2021, in the context of his candidacy for the Constitutional Convention. --Bedivere (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't keep poorly-sourced articles on the basis of speculation that better sourcing might exist somewhere that nobody has actually searched for or found — we keep or delete articles based on the quality and depth of the sources that people show. If all one had to do to save an article for deletion was to idly speculate that other sources might exist, then even outright hoaxes wouldn't be deletable from Wikipedia anymore — and even if the article gets deleted, it can always be recreated at a later date if improved quality sourcing actually does turn up that got missed now. So just speculating about the possibility of better sourcing existing somewhere in the world doesn't prevent deletion, if those sources don't actually turn up and get added to the article now.
And we need to see a lot more than just "mentions" and non-winning candidacies for offices other than the one that constitutes his attempted notability claim, so none of the sources in the comment immediately above this one add up to enough all by themselves either. Bearcat (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific analysis of sources known to be available would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:00, 20 June 2025 (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.