Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ČZW-40


 * 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 delete. MelanieN (talk) 01:36, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

ČZW-40

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable Czech firearms all sourced to primary source broken links; no reliable secondary sources found (though a Czech-language search may turn up something). All created by User:Ctway socks some 5 years ago. Some may be valid redirects to related weapons, but I'd like them all to be considered first. ansh 666 03:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  03:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  03:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  03:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

DELETE...one of a kind prototype, nothing more than firearms trivia.--RAF910 (talk) 10:03, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: non-notable militaria. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * How can it be militaria when it is in prototype phase? DeVerm (talk) 02:27, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment The links seem repairable, example: but it still is a primary source and I did not find a reliable secondary source yet, but this list is long and I can only check results are are not in Czech. DeVerm (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 21:47, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only primary sources come up for me in English and nobody offered reliable secondary references so must conclude all of these articles fail to meet out notability guideline. DeVerm (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete all and there's still nothing for the needed substance for their own independent articles. SwisterTwister   talk  08:42, 1 July 2016 (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.