Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wwii equipment


 * 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 as content fork, per WP:SNOW. User:Agunter999 has been blocked as a purely disruptive account. postdlf (talk) 06:10, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Wwii equipment

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Appears to be a content fork of List of common World War II infantry weapons, with some information from other WWII-related lists, used by the article's creator to evade discussion at Talk:List of common World War II infantry weapons. jfd34 ( talk ) 15:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. It is a content fork of List of common World War II infantry weapons created by User:Agunter999 after failing to get support for controversial changes to the scope of that article. Before creating Wwii equipment Agunter999 was involved in two edit wars on List of common World War II infantry weapons, on 20 May and over the past couple of days, for which he has been warned. He has also been warned for signature forgery and removal of content on Talk:List of common World War II infantry weapons, for posting a comment and trying to make it appear as if it was made by someone else, and then twice deleting the comment when his signature forgery had been detected and reverted. Allan Akbar (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Agunter999 (talk) 16:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It has other information
 * IT is also clearer and holds more information than the others, maby they should be deleated
 * Allan Akbar has also been involved in these edit wars so also be cautioned — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agunter999 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * No, I haven't been involved in an edit war with Agunter999. I took no part at all on 20 May and all I have done over the past couple of days is reverting his irrelevant additions on List of common World War II infantry weapons, without breaking the 3RR rule, and detecting and reverting Agunter999's signature forgery on Talk:List of common World War II infantry weapons. So don't try to put the blame on me. Allan Akbar (talk) 18:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 17:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 17:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 17:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment – Clearly this issue needs to be arbitrated, rather than being hashed out here. Regards, RJH (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as a WP:POVFORK. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:54, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as POV forking. This is clearly a run around to circumvent consensus. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  19:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete It is easy enough to hash this out here, as we don't do multiple artilcles on the same topic just because someone doesn't like what the editors on the the main article come to a consensus to do. There's nothing to salvage here, it just needs to go away. DreamGuy (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree - POVfork is quite relevant here. Skier Dude  ( talk ) 00:27, 25 June 2012 (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.