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. postdlf (talk) 01:01, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Legal status of the AK-47 (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)

Numerous gun law articles, including fully automatic/assault weapon law pages. No reason to have a page specifically for the ak47, and the laws discussed only cover a subset of the laws in existence, and also only a subset of the ak47 variants in existence. Merge anything valuable into the appropriate articles, and delete this one. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as WP:Content fork of the various gun control law articles. Ansh666 22:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete...The "Legal status of the AK-47" page is clearly "an attempt to offer or render a legal opinion". While this is not expressly forbidden by Wiki, it should be discouraged. Anyone who has edited Wiki for any length of time can attest to finding factually inaccurate information, propaganda, vandalism, even outright lies throughout the Wikipedia Encyclopedia. Even, if an editor is qualified to discuss the subject. It is too easy for correct information to be altered or removed by someone who is NOT qualified to discuss the subject....Wikipedia:Legal disclaimer reads.....

WIKIPEDIA DOES NOT GIVE LEGAL OPINIONS

Wikipedia contains articles on many legal topics; however, no warranty whatsoever is made that any of the articles are accurate. There is absolutely no assurance that any statement contained in an article touching on legal matters is true, correct or precise. Law varies from place to place and it evolves over time—sometimes quite quickly. Even if a statement made about the law is accurate, it may only be accurate in the jurisdiction of the person posting the information; as well, the law may have changed, been modified or overturned by subsequent development since the entry was made on Wikipedia.

The legal information provided on Wikipedia is, at best, of a general nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a licensed professional, i.e., by a competent authority with specialised knowledge who can apply it to the particular circumstances of your case. Please contact a local bar association, law society or similar association of jurists in your legal jurisdiction to obtain a referral to a competent legal professional if you do not have other means of contacting an attorney-at-law, lawyer, civil law notary, barrister or solicitor.

Neither the individual contributors, system operators, developers, nor sponsors of Wikipedia nor anyone else connected to Wikipedia can take any responsibility for the results or consequences of any attempt to use or adopt any of the information or disinformation presented on this web site.

Nothing on Wikipedia.org or of any project of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., should be construed as an attempt to offer or render a legal opinion or otherwise engage in the practice of law.--RAF910 (talk) 20:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I don't see why a separate article is needed. Select-fire (i.e. "full auto") firearms are prohibited (for civilians) in most parts of the world. There may be one or two cases where the AK is explicitly named in legislation, but most of the article is simply particularizing from the general prohibitions. Someone not using his real name (talk) 00:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not distinctive contents-wise, regardless of the weapon's large production volumes. I agree with the above comments.Truth or consequences-2 (talk) 00:50, 26 July 2013 (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.