Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Type 85 submachine gun


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Smartyllama (talk) 18:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Type 85 submachine gun

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Content is a paraphrase of https://modernfirearms.net/en/submachine-guns/china-submachine-guns/tip-85-eng/ without any other refs or indication of notability. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 23:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 23:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 23:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Keep: Seems popular enough to have several independent articles talking about it, and only that type edit: these articles have predecessor types too. Those should be incorporated into the page. The much more immediate problem is that this entire page not only relies on a single source, but plagiarized from it. That needs to be entirely rewritten. OfficerCow (talk) 06:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * could you provide said sources? I had difficulty finding them. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 06:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll dump a few here:, , , . Perhaps the three types could be merged into a single article? OfficerCow (talk) 07:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have no strong opinion on merging vs deleting vs fixing the article. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 07:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Keep - quick search, and it looks like there are a number of sources supporting the subject of this article. Deathlibrarian (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Google News results suggest sufficient notability. imv VocalIndia (talk) 04:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Needs improvement. STSC (talk) 06:48, 20 January 2021 (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.