Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ID Sniper rifle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. W.marsh 18:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ID Sniper rifle

ID Sniper rifle (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

fictional product, not notable. Sources provided either fail WP:RS or aren't in english. Arthur 18:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

  • keep. Yes notable, the rifle made quite a buzz, duping Chineze arms dealers and Computerworld. Sources conform WP:RS, some are english, and non-english is not forbidden. Thanks wikiGods, en:wikipedia is a truly international project. `'Míkka 18:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
  • delete Most of the sources given are blog-type sources, some don't even link to any information. A good reliable source that is verifiable should be included. Arthur 18:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Wrong. There are newspaper links that establish notability. The author links establish correct, "non-hearsay" description. All verifiable. `'Míkka 19:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
  • keep - sources seem sufficient, though an English language version of that Der Speigle peice would be good. Could possibly do with some clean up. Artw 21:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I think the controversy surrounding the gun as a hoax makes it notable. Captain panda 03:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete insufficient sourcing for notability. N2e 15:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I just found the article via WP:GUNS and tried to clean up the references a little and link to a couple of editorials at Computerworld. Letting you know, in case it changes anything. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 01:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Seems notable to me. Liveforever22 08:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.