Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GatMalite

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. Owen× ☎ 13:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GatMalite[edit]

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

Possible hoax. An unregistered user raised the following concerns [1]: "The only proof of the GatMalite is through poorly photoshoppped images, dubious rifle listings, as well as fan made airsoft rifles/mockups. There is no proof of existence, or footage, of such a rifle functioning, nor is it acknowledged by the supposed creator of the rifle, the Knight's Armament Company." (See also the talk page.) No useful references, and Google hits for the name of the device mostly consist of copies of the Wikipedia article. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:COPYVIO applies as the whole article appears here --Whiteguru (talk) 08:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No other evidence of notability is found in news, books, scholar. --Whiteguru (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Can't find any references. The onus is on the authors to prove its notability using trusted sources. - Yk³ talk · contrib 10:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. None of the sources or images in the article are from reliable sources. Ward20 (talk) 01:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 20:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: even if this weren't a fairly obvious hoax/copyvio, there isn't any evidence to suggest notability. There are thousands of AR-15 clones/variants in the market, and this doesn't seem to be anything special. bahamut0013^words _deeds 20:42, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't appear to be a hoax, I have found a lot of discussion about it online and folks claiming to own/sell/buying one. However, I've also found discussion that it was only ever a prototype and a lot of faked images of it. Overall, doesnt seem notable.--v/r - T P 15:14, 13 May 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.