Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Changfeng (missile) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to CJ-10 (missile). Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Changfeng (missile)
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Entirely non-notable. All listed sources appear to be primary or simple databases. Wikipedia is not a database. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC) I have realized that a discussion has already occurred, but I did not know when making this nomination. Despite that, I stand by this deletion. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and China. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * That AfD was closed as no consensus with no prejudice against renomination, so that outcome won't affect this AfD, though some of the arguments presented there may be of use to participants. Curbon7 (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to CJ-10 (missile). I think this is a nn variant of the target (let me know if I'm wrong). Nothing sourced in article so nothing to merge. I found no IS RS for notability, but I did find information in footnotes (eg: there are a few more) that led me to this. If I'm wrong this should be deleted, because it fails GNG.  // Timothy :: talk  14:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - Not seeing the sourcing that would establish notability. I'd also be happy with a redirect per, if we can conclusively associate this to the target, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what is going on with all these acronyms and reporting names. -Ljleppan (talk) 07:55, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Many additional references are missing, and parts of the article require documentation to verify their accuracy.YE SIQI (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Lack of notability. I am not opposed to the proposed redirect though. SignificantPBD (talk) 12:31, 3 April 2023 (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.