Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PH-45

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. j⚛e decker^talk 01:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

PH-45

PH-45 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completing nom for IP User:2.60.102.76, whose edit-summary rationale was "the only source is a dead link." Ansh666 11:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 11:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. Neither any reliable source mentioned nor found. Looks pure spam to me as every weapon has some sorts of safety points. It doesn't make any sense to claim as the notable one. A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 12:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
• Delete - I found it difficult to verify anything other then it exists with any reliable sources. - Pmedema (talk) 13:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• DELETE...no reliable sources. The only info I found was an image on a blog site. No way of knowing if it even is a real firearm.--RAF910 (talk) 03:33, 18 June 2014 (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.