Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG

In today's world, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG has become a topic of increasing interest to a wide variety of people. With the advancement of technology and globalization, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG has taken a central role in different aspects of modern society. From its impact on the economy to its influence on culture and politics, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG has generated debates and discussions around its importance and repercussions. In this article, we will explore the various dimensions of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG, analyzing its implications and challenges in today's world. From its origins to its evolution today, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ENARM SMG has marked a turning point in the way we approach different aspects of contemporary life.
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 redirect to MAC-10#Enarm SMG. (non-admin closure) Yash! 10:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

ENARM SMG (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)

Non-notable firearm. An English-language search found no reliable sources; possibly Portuguese-speaker may be able to help. Created by User:Ctway sock. ansh666 08:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. ansh666 08:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. ansh666 08:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. ansh666 08:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

DELETE...Dead end, one of a kind experimental weapons, with limited or no supporting references to establish notability do not meet guidelines.--RAF910 (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti Talk 17:19, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
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.