Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curries of Arran: A Brief History and Their Tartan


 * 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. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:57, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Curries of Arran: A Brief History and Their Tartan

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article appears to be an argument for the validity of a particular Scottish clan despite a lack of historical evidence to support that validity, and possibly a promotion of a particular manufacturer's tartan as an authentic clan tartan. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:39, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  04:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NOTESSAY, smells distinctly of soap, too. Not sure about the spam, but overall this isn't the sort of thing that should be on Wikipedia (not to mention the title a. is horrendous and b. made me want Indian food!) - The Bushranger One ping only 19:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research, unless someone wants to demonstrate which assertion was made in which reliable source. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Rename/Rewrite. There is a Clan Currie and sources could be found to rewrite article once renamed and with the removal of unsupported information. I can look at this in the coming week. Delete should this timeframe not be timely enough. Newm30 (talk) 23:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This seems to check out. For an example of a source see The surnames of Scotland and for an example of a related article see Muireadhach Albanach.  The article just needs wikification and improvement per our editing policy.   The nomination claims "a lack of historical evidence" and yet the article contained 9 references and examples like The Book of Arran seem accurate.  Please see WP:BITE and WP:BEFORE.  Colonel Warden (talk) 14:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. First of all Currie is not a clan, this seems to be confirmed in the article itself under the title The Lord Lyon King of Arms and A New Lord Lyon King of Arms. Note that internet sites such as electricscotland.com are not reliable references. the only ref that points to Currie as a clan is made by "noted anthropologist and author Dr. Micheil MacDonald", but I can not find what this anthropologist is noted for. Grimble is another matter, a very noted historian, however his references to Currie (not as a clan) is only via the name MacMhuirichs, he states (in pp. 56 Clans and Chiefs) that "his [Murach's] descendants attached themselves to the Lord of the Isles...That is why so many MacMhuirichs were to be found in the Hebrides in modern times, their name corrupted to Currie". Grimble goes onto note that MacMhuirich were a Scottish family (father to son type rather than clan), who (until the 18 hundreds) were professional literary men to various lords (Earl of Lennox and later Lord of the isles). is my view Currie is a sept of Clan Macdonald, see MacGorrie, Currie/Curry/McCurry/Godfrey/Jeffre at Clan Macdonald of Clanranald. has hundreds of septs as many families were dependent, served, lived in the territory off, or were protected by this powerful clan. The question is, does Wikipedia need to list every family (Scottish or otherwise) surname and their individual histories? I placed McGhee Family for deletion as a test of this question, see Articles for deletion/McGhee Family; there was "no consensus" there, so please try and discuss this issue here with clear guidelines so editors like myself know where to draw the line. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 10:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete as a blatant case of WP:OR. We are not here to argue that so-and-so are to be considered as a clan. Mangoe (talk) 16:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Change to stub and Rename. The problem with most of these references is that verry little of what is said in the article is verifiable. GBooks confirms, The book of Arran does mention the Curries, but I didn't find anything similar in any of the other books. As such, it's impossible to tell whether the information in the article is really covered in the third-party sources, or just conjecture based on something else the sources said. Nevertheless, The Book of Arran looks sufficiently reliable to verify the clan exists, and I'm quite happy to assume that all Scottish clans have information about them somewhere to make them notable, so I don't see a problem with a placeholder stub. Any verifiable information can be added to the stub as and when someone finds it. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and Rename. The article is in dire need of wikifying but I see no obvious sign of OR (although the style is peacockish here and there) and so far as I am aware there are no rigorous definitions of what can and cannot be classified as clan or sept. The title is indeed horrendous and Clan Currie or similar would be better, although quite what "curry" has to do with this discussion I am not sure. Is the problem that the books are obscure and not immediately available for on-line inspection the problem? This may lead to suspicions but as I am sure all concerned know there is no requirement whatever to provide this. I'll have a look at what web-based information is available if time permits.  I know of a libarary that has one of the books quoted, but the snow here is making travel ill-advised at present.  Ben   Mac  Dui  19:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't rush in to renaming the page "Clan Currie". A lot of debate has gone into the issue of defining clans. e.g here or here. Currie Family is a better name in my view if the article is kept. Yours Ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 13:52, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It amazes me that anyone could read this article and think it is an attempt to establish the name Currie as a Clan recognized by the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs. If there has never been a Clan Chief of the Curries, and there never will be, then there is no tartan that will ever be an "official" Currie tartan. Just because one particular line of the family was in servitude to the MacDonalds, and there are no records to suggest that this line was the line of primogeniture, that does not make all the Curries in the world into a sept of the MacDonalds of Clanranald. The Murchard to whom Arran was given could very well have been the direct line, as could so many others -- it will never be known. Rename the article The Curries of Arran and be done with it. Much ado about nothing. Arran56 (talk) 04:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Quite take the point about clan definitions. "Curries of Arran" or "Currie family" are fine by me. I have added Category:Scottish families. Ben   Mac  Dui  10:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. This article is really just about showing off a tartan and clan society. It's not encyclopaedic. It's just fluff. An internet clan. The article doesn't even mention a family seated on the Isle of Arran at all... What have they done? Why are they notable? Who has written about them? The notable family is the MacMhuirich family of bards who were employed by the MacDonalds. That's the article Wikipedia should have instead of this. It's easy to find scholarly works mentioning them when on Google Books and Google Scholar. Works that deal with the family and members of the family. One the MacMhuirichs was the author of the MS 1467 for example. I think that this article is something like a coatrack. It leans on the bardic family for their notability and ancestry, but the rest is all tartan-fluff and someone's disgruntled POV about being 'a clan in it's own right' and 'not a sept of another clan'. No source is given for the claimed "Murchard" ancestor of Arran. I think in reality this guy is considered by modern historians to be a MacSween (see third paragraph here: Clan_Sweeney quoting G.W.S. Barrow). Czar Brodie noted how the Grimble ref actually deals with the MacMhuirichs rather than a Currie family from Arran. I think that ties in with the coatrack I mentioned. Colonel Warden mentioned Surnames of Scotland, this book only has a small paragraph (two sentences) on the relevant surname (p.194): 'A modification of MacVurich', and mentions one man named Archibald from Row, Dumbartonshire. Colonel Warden also mentioned the Arran Book, here it is here, it really only mentions the surname and how it morphed from the Gaelic form to Currie; I can't find anything about a noted family on Arran in the book.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 00:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I started an article for the MacMhuirich bardic family, and an article for the Gaelic surname MacMhuirich. There's also one for the surname Currie. So the bardic family is covered, and the two surnames are covered. That leaves the clan society and it's tartan. Neither are notable in my opinion. I think the society's webpage should go as an external link on the bardic family's article, because the society was "originally formed in Glasgow, Scotland in 1959 to further the knowledge and appreciation of the MacMhuirich (pronounced MacVurich) bardic dynasty" . The family/clan of note was the family of bards.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. This article implies that people with the surname Currie are descended from a sept of the MacMhuirich clan in the 18th century which in turn was descended from Muiredach O'Daly in the 12th century. That is untrue of the vast majority of people with that surname and may give offence to those Currie families of much longer standing.  The surname Currie  has a number of different origins.  Four of these are given in the article Currie (surname).  Others are given in Burke's Peerage & Baronetage, section Currie.  The Currie Baronets are not descended from the MacMhuirich clan, but from the Curries of Annandale.  Sir Walter de Currie of Annandale bore that name in 1296, well before the conversion of MacMhuirich to MacCurry in the 18th century.  Philip Currie, 1st Baron Currie was not descended from MacMhuirich,  nor were the bankers Curries & Co, nor Mark John Currie, explorer and one of the founders of Western Australia, nor James Currie (physician), the biographer of Robert Burns, nor the members of Parliament William Currie (British politician),  Raikes Currie and Henry Currie, nor . ..


 * This being the case, it would be incorrect and unacceptable for the article to be retitled 'Currie Family' as suggested by Czar Brodie.  The title  'Curries of Arran'  is also dubious.  Sir Piers de Currie of Arran, recorded in the Norse Chronicles, already bore the Currie name in the 13th century.  His name may have been derived from his castle on the Isle of Arran near Corrie.  In any case, he fought for the King of the Scots against the  Norse.  So he fought against “Murchard” or “Margad”.  He was slain in the Battle of Largs in 1263, but if any Curries survived, they would be more entitled to be called the 'Curries of Arran' than the MacMhuirich clan.


 * The Clan Currie site gives an interesting and, I suspect, more accurate description of the transition of a sept of MacMhuirich to the Clan Currie. The Currie tartan granted to the new clan in 1822 is different from the one proposed in the article proposed for deletion.  Two different tartans for the Curries stemming from MacMhuirich?


 * It would take a major effort to remove all the inaccuracies in the article and upgrade it to the quality people expect from wikipedia, so I recommend deletion. Apuldram (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2010 (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.