Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Systems of inheritance among various peoples

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Systems of inheritance among various peoples[edit]

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

This article's current content is essentially a monograph, and reads as a personal essay. I say reads: it is actually close to unreadable. There are several closely related topics (e.g. Historical inheritance systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), I think there is escessive redundancy, and this essay-like article should be the one to go. Guy (Help!) 09:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did my best to keep the article readable and created several split offs of Historical inheritance systems. But it looks like Ansegam and sockpuppets recreated the mess. So, too bad for my efforts: delete The Banner talk 10:17, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I feel bad for you. You tried hard to help them get it, but they simply don't. Guy (Help!) 10:49, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:03, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:04, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This content already exists elsewhere. I don't know why there's been such activity on this article in the past couple years. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In principle, Delete or merge to Historical inheritance systems. However, I wonder if it does not in fact contain useful material that might be preserved by splitting out the inheritance practices of various countries. Historical inheritance systems is also something of a mess, and probably also needs splitting. For example, I did not see in it "Common Law land inheritance", as practised in England and Ireland until 1925, and I suspect in US and Commonwealth jurisdictions to this day; possibly I was unobservant. Certainly the present article should not survive as it is: it is a horrible essay. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's too essay like and I strongly suspect that there's a lot of overlap between this article, Historical inheritance systems and Systems of social stratification. It's hard to tell if there is anything in one article and not the other that would be worth merging because, as Guy said, it's close to unreadable. I think the best thing to do would be to start with one article, Historical inheritance systems, reorganize the whole thing using the information and refs there and then split it in a better way (maybe by country) where necessary. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge if you can save something useful. Fruitmince (talk) 00:51, 13 September 2016 (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.