Deletion of Robert B. Strecker

Comment: The nomination concentrates on , which probably fails, where the angle is more  in my opinion.  I believe there was already a redlink prior to creation of this article.  Existing article sources may not be sufficient to establish notability, as not fully embellished by a somewhat prolific stub bio. creator who goes I'm not really going to do legwork but have done some article boilerplating
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: Non-notable  researcher; for such people, we cannot produce a properly neutral article without in-depth mainstream coverage of their work. I don't even think there's currently enough here to support the current name-drop at Discredited HIV/AIDS origins theories nor a redirect there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: to Discredited HIV/AIDS origins theories, or '''delete'''.  Redirects are cheap, and the  stuff seems to have gotten some limited attention for a period of time as a fringe/conspiracy theory; he's covered somewhat prominently in this https://www.jstor.org/stable/43287281 overview on JSTOR of such theories.  I'm not seeing enough GNG coverage for a standalone article; certainly no sign of 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:NPROF)