Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clan MacInnes


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 16:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Clan MacInnes

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

an unsourced stub about an unnotable scottish clan. ltbdl (talk) 14:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Clearly in need of some work but have you carried out WP:BEFORE? Compared to other clans, info is relatively scant but on a quick search, Ian Grimble has an entry in his "Scottish Clans and Tartans" from 1973 and there's this and this. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. ltbdl (talk) 14:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 15:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep based on the sources provided by Mutt Lunker. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:55, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article was gutted three times in the last week for lack of RS with no apparent attempt to improve it with sources. It is appropriately tagged with . Deleting this article does nothing to improve Wikipedia. • Policy-specific objections: It is abundantly clear that WP:BEFORE was not even attempted. B2 (and all of D) per  and gScholar note below; B3 (wholesale gutting noted above); B6 (there are 336 inbound links); and B4, C1 and C3 (nothing on Talk at all). As a Scottish clan, WP:GNG is incredibly easy to establish with a quick search on gScholar. Note that, when improving the article, some care will need to be taken as many scholars of Clan MacInnes are members of the Clan, either by name or descent, which may make some of them WP:PRIMARY. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 14:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Potentially restore this version, tagging it as unreferenced.  The account in that version reads to me as a credible account from tradition.  I would expect there to be some published sources providing confirmation of some of that.  Clan organisation websites are not an ideal source, due to COI and possibly even COPYVIO, but are better than nothing.  Peterkingiron (talk) 11:06, 8 September 2023 (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.