User talk:Keserman/Merwin Hulbert and company

deletion objection in advance
this article seem like it may be liable for deletion or deletion nomination.this is a recreation of a deleted article,improved with better referencing,grammar and such.this is a notable firearms company,historical and existing,referenced.this article is as good as colt firearm's article or s&w,or remington.also,please let me know if it meets criteria for deletion,so i can fix mistakes and such,if i can.Keserman (talk) 12:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It is completely unsourced. While the article's topic is not notable, the text on the page also appears to be nonsense. Sorry. If you really want to create this, maybe you should userfy the page first. &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 12:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

objection to deletion above and below!
ok,i would seriously want a good reason why this should be deleted.i perhaps can understand the deletion of the previous version,but this seems improved sufficiently,referenced,and coherent.i dispute in respect,but this seems too much....this is a historical and notable company,which fairly little information is available on it,and is mentioned on wikipedia articles.where is the very good reason for deletion of this valuable source.Keserman (talk) 12:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Why don't you userfy the page and then get advice about fixes before posting? &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 12:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)