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. Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Asahi Firearms[edit]

Asahi Firearms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Original PROD rationale: Did not locate any substantive sources on a search. The Japanese wiki article is sourced entirely to blogs/commercial sellers, so none of those sources are suitable. When I tried to search the Japanese name (アサヒファイアーアームズ) I got nothing but marketplace listings.

Article was de-PROD'd but no actual reliable sources have been added. CollectorAirsoft.com is a sales website and is not reliable, and WWII Guns appears to be an enthusiast blog, also not an RS. ♠PMC(talk) 23:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not only did you leave me a nasty note, but you left some pithy comments in the edit history. Oh, and then not only did you revert, but you escalated by moving this to AFD. A clear example of Meta:Don't be a jerk. --evrik (talk) 04:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I left an explanation of my edit, as is expected for an edit summary. I'm sorry that my accurate description of the content as unsourced and machine translated was problematic for you. And of course I took it to AfD - I didn't locate any sources on a BEFORE search, and you hadn't added any. ♠PMC(talk) 01:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I'm calling you jerk for leaving a nasty note on my talk page, leaving aggressive edit summaries and escalating the prod into an AFD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by evrik (talkcontribs)
  • Well, perhaps if had waited longer than 15 minutes for me to expand the article, we wouldn't be having this discussion, right? --evrik (talk) 03:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No? Because regardless of how much you expand the article, notability depends on the availability of reliable sources. Which you have still, after two days and lots of arguing, failed to produce. ♠PMC(talk) 04:03, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.