Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6-inch gun M1917


 * 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 deleted by RHaworth - the article was deleted by RHaworth (log) per WP:G7. (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 03:54, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

6-inch gun M1917

 * – ( View AfD View log   )

I messed up creating this article. The source I used misidentified the gun as being built in the USA and based on the BL 6-inch Mk.VIII naval gun when it's actually a variant of the BL 6-inch Mk.XIX gun. I should have suspected as much when I couldn't find any other references to it. A redirect to the Brazilian section and expansion of that section in the Mk.XIX article would be more appropriate. Snowdawg (talk 22:02, 31 December 2018‎ (UTC)

Chamberlain, Peter (1975). Heavy artillery. Gander, Terry,. New York: Arco. p. 43. ISBN 0668038985. OCLC 2143869. Snowdawg (talk 23:56, 31 December 2018‎ (UTC)


 * It may interest you that Glen Williford's 2016 book on US mobile artillery has a decent section on this gun, but does leave the reader guessing as to where it was made. This is a great source for anything US-made or used 1875–1953. RobDuch (talk) 03:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  AustralianRupert (talk) 10:40, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  AustralianRupert (talk) 10:40, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 January 7.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 10:41, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comments Interesting, looks like a 1930s 7.5 Mk III barrel on a Vickers field mount. Govvy (talk) 12:33, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:11, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect as suggested. Only one ref says the US type is real, it can be an interesting mention on the main page. They seem to know what they are on about, give them what they want.(Dushan Jugum (talk) 07:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)).
 * I second that, just do it yourself. . (Dushan Jugum (talk) 23:31, 14 January 2019 (UTC)).


 * Redirect per above.  as you created the article you can request its speedy deletion per G7 and then recreate it as a redirect.  Or just blank the page and redirect it.    SITH   (talk)   22:08, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Potentially keep  If they had a sufficiently different service history, then I'd have no objection to keep two separate articles. Otherwise merge and redirect would be fine – it ought to stay as a distinct section in the target article though, clearly they were distinct enough for that.
 * Mostly though, I don't think anyone would object to whatever you want to do with it (even closing this, making the changes yourself and deleting (if absolutely necessary) with db-user. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:10, 15 January 2019 (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.