Deletion of Peter Belohlavek (2nd nomination)

Comment: As far as I can tell, he doesn't meet any of the notability criteria at .  It took longer to determine if  is met.  My conclusion was that it was not, because it didn't appear to me that there was enough significant independent coverage of him to meet that standard.  I labeled my vote as weak in case my language skills were not up to the task
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: Low citation counts on Google Scholar https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=4ZsVJV8AAAAJ show a clear failure to meet #C1, no other criterion of  seems to be met, and the article doesn't appear to even be attempting to claim any form of non-academic notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: basically per nom. For academic  cases, / are the main operative guidelines. There is too little coverage in independent mainstream reliable sources in this case to pass /
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:BIO||WP:GNG||WP:BIO||WP:GNG)