Deletion of Paliam

Comment: Move''' or '''Userfy'''.  ''Paliath Achan'' is a historical title, worthy of an article, and some of the content here is a sound start for that article.  Google Books gives http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=Paliath+Achan&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=&as_maxy=&as_isbn=  three secondary sources that use this form of the title and http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=Paliyat+Achan&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=&as_maxy=&as_isbn= two that use ''Paliyat Achan''.  http://www.hindu.com/2004/10/12/stories/2004101215120300.htm This article or http://www.hindu.com/2005/03/01/stories/2005030108200500.htm this article from ''The Hindu'' also establish usage of ''Paliath Achan'' as a historical term.  At the minimum, we should have an article on that title, and move this there to be a start for it.  There are also a couple of other articles from the website of that paper available showing that the family is still extant, but would not be citable to establish the article.  The Reference listed in the article doesn't appear to have been scanned by Google books yet, so I can't evaluate it.  However, on the basis of  we should all assume that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: and '''Move''' to Paliath Achans per trialsanderrors, since this is their claim to notability. Wikipedia is |not a geneology database
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: WP:NOT a genealogy database (or a place for family feuds), so only particularly notable families are encyclopedic, IMHO.  The "Hereditary Prime Minister" claim might come close, but the poor sourcing also calls for a deletion under 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)