Deletion of Historical inheritance systems

Comment: although it could be more convenient to use , it has admittedly become big beyond repair. Infinitely too many references and is unencyclopedic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:BLOWITUP)

Comment: with a recommendation of a rewrite.  I see a few obvious problems that could probably be fixed with a bit of determined editing (or, possibly, a well-written script).  The alleged } and  will be significantly more difficult to detect and replace, but one could always solicit an expert from the most relevant WikiProject.  The violations of  are more significant, and will require extensive editing; though it is not well-suited to Wikipedia, nominating it for cleanup would probably be a better solution than deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN||WP:NOT)

Comment: as |original research and |synthesis. This monster has over 500 references but the overarching topic itself is not discussed in the references, which instead discuss narrower matters.The article topic is therefore the creation of the author of this non-encyclopedic article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN)

Comment: WP:BLOWITUP is not policy; the actual policy is .  The topic is quite notable as there are numerous works describing inheritance law in various societies.  Works which try to provide historical perspective exist such as ''http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8oHcx3KlvsAC Dead Hands: A Social History of Wills, Trusts, and Inheritance Law''.  Digesting and summarising these is a matter of ordinary editing in which explosives play no part
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE)