Deletion of Gambo (carcass)

Comment: with no prejudice against including this in a list of similar things somewhere appropriate. I hate to pile on but  is not satisfied in current or previous versions of the article. Searching only found a handful of appropriate sources which have only isolated in-passing coverage. Special:Contributions/2604:2000:8FC0:4:617F:E9A7:AF1C:4546|2604:2000:8FC0:4:617F:E9A7:AF1C:4546
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Eberhart looks reliable in this case. There is significant coverage in at least one reliable independent source, but it's not a secondary source, it's a catalogue of about a thousand of these beasties. Considering  and  is there enough for an article. This isn't addressed above.&mdash
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPAPER||WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: no |reliable sources in any version of the article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: This cryptid appears to totally fail . The only cite that was in the article was the Gizmodo article reviewing the book Cryptozoologicon, and that's a self-published book. Doesn't contribute to notability. Everything else listed here and that I can find searching is a fringe source; can't be used. There appears to literally not be a single reliable source upon which we can base an article. I don't think a policy-compliant version is possible
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:NFRINGE)