Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Routledge surname 15th to 18th centuries


 * 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. As has been noted, original research is not allowed in Wikipedia.  Sandstein  17:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

History of Routledge surname 15th to 18th centuries

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a family history of non-notable people; not suitable for Wikipedia per WP:NOTGENEALOGY, also WP:CFORK (more appropriate history now at Routledge (surname)) Linshee ☺ 14:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:34, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:34, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is less a family history and more just a timeline of passing mentions and WP:PRIMARY records, with the underlying assumption that simply sharing a surname is a sufficient unifying characteristic for a coherent encyclopedia article. WP:GNG fail and major-league WP:SYNTH. Agricolae (talk) 16:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * They are not a 'Less Family'. They were an integral Border Reiver Family and this page was critical in expanding the knowledge to others. It is not genealogical, but rather researched and historical linking key figures in Anglo-Scottish history. 185.13.50.210 (talk) 13:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - I would agree with the view that a detailed history of a non-notable family in a specific time period is never going to meet the standard for a Wikipedia article. Much of the content is arguably trivia and, as has been said, it is very like a timeline in places. I also agree with the view that appropriate information about the history of the Rutledge name is best included at Routledge (surname). Dunarc (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not trivia but rather the history of one of the 7 Border Reiver Famnilies, of which each have a Society and a Wikipedia page. This is proven evidence based on decades of research by the Routledge Clan Society. 185.13.50.211 (talk) 12:49, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article encapsulates and documents 300 years of English/Scottish border strife, a particularly violent period in British history. It is as much about memorializing the dozens of near-forgotten sources cited as it is about following the survival pathway of one ordinary family. non-notable people The Routledge family was "notable" enough within the timespan to have been recorded in numerous primary records, which prove that they were involved in many notable incidents alongside their better-known cohorts, lords, masters, and enemies. As to WP:NOTGENEALOGY, documents for the timespan covered would not be otherwise available at any commercially-oriented family history site operating today, including those cited in the alternate article Routledge (surname). To delete the article entirely would negate significant research effort. To break up the article according to WP:CFORK guidelines would interrupt the evolution of the surname and the intent of the article. Diane Redfern User talk:Diane Redfern
 * Sorry, but this sounds like your rationale for retention is that it should be kept intact specifically because it is a WP:OR WP:SOAPBOX in need of a WP:WEBHOST. Agricolae (talk) 16:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)


 * (with some regret) Ultimately delete -- This is a substantial article on family history, which is clearly the result of very substantial research, but it does not belong in Wikipedia. It would be wrong to delete Diane Redfern's article out of hand, because it is a substantial research article.  The purpose of asking for it to be userified is to give her an opportunity of copying what she has produced, with a view to publishing it elsewhere.  The right venue would be a family history journal or perhaps a county archaeological society journal or a family history website.  I would hope that Diane Redfern as its main author can confirm HERE that she has made a copy, so that the result of deleting it is that her substantial work is not permanently destroyed.  Wikipedia is the wrong venue for such an article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:53, 5 November 2021 (UTC)


 * This is proven evidence based on decades of research by the Routledge Clan Society 185.13.50.211 (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * THe removal of this page is disgusting and the Routledge surname has played a significate part in key British and French History. Only the key persons (non related) have be placed on here. 185.13.50.178 (talk) 13:17, 15 August 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.