Deletion of Goatman: Flesh or Folklore?

Comment: per the last three above. As is self-evident, the sources fail the crucial requirement for a |reliable source: a solid reputation for fact-checking. It's not totally inconceivable that a book vanity-published by Amazon might become fully notable by our standards (with substantial reviews in the ''New York Times'', the ''Times Literary Supplement'' and the like), but that is most definitely not the case here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: This is a Createspace self-published book pushing  claims (example: "Of course, just about everyone says it’s all just an urban legend. Except for those who’ve came face-to-muzzle with the Goatman himself, or the families of those who’ve died while trying to encounter the monster"). With zero  sources available to build an objective article with, it can only cite gushing reviews from other fringe-mongers. If, someday, it should gain notability outside the fringe bubble which are more than passing mentions, we can revisit
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:FRIND)