Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Günter Bechly
He has one well-cited paper ("Fossil odonates in Tertiary amber"), one reasonably well-cited co-edited volume ("The Crato fossil beds of Brazil: Window into an ancient world"), and lower citations for his other works, not enough to convince me of a pass of |our standards for academic notability. His turn to |fringe creationist views does not seem to be notable at all, and cannot be covered without mainstream sources giving it an adequately |neutral point of view. So the only possible source of notability would be as an exhibit curator, but that would require in-depth coverage of his role in the exhibits or as a museum leader (not just inherited notability from special exhibits he organized) and I don't see that in the article. On top of all that, the |autobiography issues are a big problem. And none of the sources we have are |reliable; the only one with any plausible appearance of reliability and independence from the subject, the interview by Probst, is essentially self-published
— User:David, 18:30, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:PROF||WP:FRINGE||WP:NPOV||WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Notability)