Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springfield M21

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 17:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Springfield M21

I don't know anything about guns, but an article that starts out "No gun officially known as the Springfield M21 exists" has got a problem. From the orphan article list, not edited in 18 months. Note that it used to redirect to M21 (rifle) until this diff [1] pointed out that the M21 was not actually made by Springfield. Thatcher131 15:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if redirect is not correct - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 16:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. "No gun...exists" is definitely a problem. Amalas =^_^= 17:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above; may qualify for A7. -- stubblyh ea d | ^T/_c 18:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete articles about things that don't exist. -- Mithent 18:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Revert to redirect. If the gun M21 is sometimes known as "Springfield M21" even mistakenly, it is worth a redirect. The target article should mention this. Now, if it isn't a remotely common term, then none of this holds. A search for "Springfield M21" returns a number of gun sales sites that appear to sell a gun looking an awful lot like the one at M21 (rifle), so that would seem to support my point. (But I know about as much about models of guns as I know about.... well its not a lot.) - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 21:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Talk:M21 (rifle):

:Springfield Inc. makes M21 and M25 rifles which are loosely based upon their military counterparts of the same designation. Much like the way that their name implies a relationship the former US military armory, the commercial firm Springfield Armory capitalizes on the implication that their products are the same as those used by the military. FWIW: The article should probably redirect here. --D.E. Watters 19:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This supports redirect notion. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 23:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to M21 (rifle). For a gun that doesn't exist it seems to be available at a lot of places. Though if I'm lucky I know almost as much about guns as Keith. Voice of Treason 15:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Aren't there any ~~gun nuts~~ firearms enthusiasts on wikipedia? After looking around wikipedia and the web, I will withdraw the nomination, in favor of some rewriting and disambiguation. It seems that the Springfield Armory, a US Gov't operation, manufactured the M14 Rifle, which was converted to the M21 (rifle) by the Rock Island Arsenal in the 1960s. Meanwhile, a private gun manufacturer bought the Springfield name and now operates as Springfield Armory, Inc. which does sell a model M21, although I can't tell if it is the same design and specs as the government model (I'm sure its at least close). I think there needs to be some disambiguation between models made by and for the military versus models made by the new private company for private use. Thatcher131 17:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See now, this is exactly the sort of situation where polemic userboxes would come in handy. We could just go look for the users with Template:User_NRA. :) - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 18:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment FYI I asked the fine upstanding gun experts at Talk:M21 (rifle). - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 18:24, 26 May 2006 (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.