Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Arms


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 11:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Alexander Arms

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of significant coverage by reliable third party sources. A few entries in gun digests that simply show a list what's on the market and a product review on a site of questionable reliability don't seem to pass WP:CORP Niteshift36 (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment...Alexander Arms is well known within the firearms industry itself. However, I can understand how casual users would have never heard of them, as they generally do not advertise in mainstream gun magazines. I therefore can see augments for both sides. Perhaps, we should add a citation needed header to the article, give it a couple of months and if nobody has added notable references we can delete it then. If nothing else, you would think that one of their employees would add the appropriate references.--RAF910 (talk) 14:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no dispute that they are known in the industry and the nominator is more than a "casual user". Lack of advertising isn't really relevant since advertising isn't the significant coverage that is required. This has been tagged for notability or references during the past 7 years. They just never materialized. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:17, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough, I have no problem deleting the article. I'm sure someone will restore the article in the future, when better reference are available.--RAF910 (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:15, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Beyond press releases, there doesn't seem to be any sources covering the company. I did find a few reviews about 1 or 2 specific guns made by this company. But there was hardly any information about the company itself. And a simple review of a product doesn't really add up to notability either. Delete as it fails WP:CORPDEPTH. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:45, 7 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.