TM 31-210 Improvised Munitions Handbook : Nothing in the article suggests it is notable.  Effectively unreferenced outside a popculture trivia note.  As such, this fails not just WP:GNG but also WP:OR .  My BEFORE shows next to nothing, at least under the current name.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 13:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 13:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete.  I'm seeing a number of references in reliable sources to its distribution by militias and terrorist groups, but it doesn't seem like quite enough for notability. — Moriwen ( talk ) 15:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I think this entry should not be deleted: as Moriwen said, this manual is widely distributed among militias and terrorist groups, who evidently use it to build various items with which they carry out their actions: already this should indicate that the manual TM 31-210 is noteworthy.  Furthermore, publications written by and read by veterans also deem this manual worthy of mention: This is an actual Army guide to creating an entire arsenal (We Are The Mighty).  Furthermore, this manual has been mentioned several times in medias, being involved in many news events, see for example: Couple's Cardiff home 'like bomb-making factory' (BBC), Norwich man found guilty of terror offences (BBC), Coalville 'weapons hoarder' jailed for 10 years (BBC), Far-right Army reject convicted of collecting terror documents (The Scottish Farmer), Norwich: Man, 25, goes on trial for terror offences (Norwich Evening News).  82.54.189.142 ( talk ) 21:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Which of these meet WP:SIGCOV ?  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Surely the article reported in We Are The Mighty written by Logan Nye, an Army journalist and paratrooper in the 82nd, meet WP:SIGCOV criteria.  It addresses the topic directly and in detail, and conclude with: "The whole handbook is interesting from an engineering, MacGyver, or historical perspective".  82.54.189.142 ( talk ) 13:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd let it pass.  But SIGCOV (GNG) requires multiple such sources.  Now, that means we need at least one more - can you point out to the second one?  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 00:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The book by Ann Larabee (The Wrong Hands: Popular Weapons Manuals and Their Historic Challenges to a Democratic Society), as mentioned in my comment of 12 March 2024, 13:49.  82.57.203.36 ( talk ) 12:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep , there exist references per 82.54.189.142.  🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg!  Talk 22:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Followup comment .  Before the discussion reaches its 7th day, and is evaluated by a volunteer "closing admin", I would like to summarize below the reasons why I believe this page should not be deleted.  The page concerns an object (TM 31-210 manual) that: – was owned by guerrilla or terrorist groups who used it to wage wars, for example in Afghanistan, which influenced the history of recent decades (see Dilip Hiro's book) – is mentioned in many media (BBC, etc.), and also by an online newspaper written by and for veterans (We Are The Mighty) who find it interesting: Logan Nye's article reaches WP:SIGCOV – appeared in a world famous film (Toy Story) – is mentioned in articles and books of scientific and historical literature that use it as a basis, source or reference to develop their analyses: see for example the book by Ann Larabee, which reaches WP:SIGCOV , which also covers other similar manuals that have their own dedicated page (see: La Salute è in voi ).  It should be noted that the page has thousands of views every month and it is included from time to time in WikiProject_Books/Popular_pages .  A clear sign that it deals with an interesting subject for the Wikipedia community, maybe deleting it could be a disservice.  Considering all of this, I believe the TM 31-210 manual has sufficient notability to be included in its own Wikipedia page.  82.54.189.142 ( talk ) 13:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per 82.54.189.142.  Schierbecker ( talk ) 14:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The book has had significant impact, as shown above.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 23:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per 82.54.189.142, useful and popular handbook.  🍪 Cookie Monster 01:05, 21 March 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep