Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enfauser

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. Davewild (talk) 09:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Enfauser

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

Completing nomination on behalf of 217.235.37.238. Rationale from talk page is There are no reliable sources provided. I had a look and can find only forums/blogs and a lot of sales. Until someone can show a reliable source I'm not convinced this is not a hoax. If a source is found the article could be merged into Lee-Enfield Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Although perhaps not 100% RS's, here here and here are enough to establish not a hoax. Print sources will be needed for proper citations though, likely. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:26, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- These are 0% RS. You are just showing what I said in the nomination: forums/blogs. 217.235.37.238 (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I never said they were RS's. I just said they disprove that the weapon is a hoax. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Google Books shows only false positives in French using the words "en Fauser". The sources provided by Bushranger are clearly not reliable. Only 217 unique hits on Google, and even some of those are false positives. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only sources are excitable web forums. There are pictures on a web auction site, but again this is not reliable. The sourcing just isn't good enough to verify that these actually exist and aren't just an urban legend and/or gullible collectors being taken advantage of. Fences&Windows 00:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "Turkey" chapter of Robert W. D. Ball's Mauser Military Rifles of the World has lots of information about various rifles, the Turkish Army's contract with Mauser, and its conversion and standardization programme of the 1930s. There's zero mention of an "Enfauser". It does (in the "Belgium" chapter on page 37) talk about the British capturing Turkish M1890 rifles at Gallipoli and the British converting them to the Belgian M1889 design. Uncle G (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2011 (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.