Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Contracts of Employment (Indigenous Workers) Convention


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   07:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Contracts of Employment (Indigenous Workers) Convention

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This disambiguation page has two articles, both stubs, neither obviously primary. Since the titles of the two conventions contain parenthesis, though, the page has been tagged as an incomplete DAB twice, in 2011 and again in 2013. The page seems unnecessary to me. Cnilep (talk) 05:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Cnilep (talk) 05:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Cnilep (talk) 05:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: I put hatnotes on Contracts of Employment (Indigenous Workers) Convention, 1939 (shelved) and Contracts of Employment (Indigenous Workers) Convention, 1947 (shelved) just prior to listing the DAB for deletion. Cnilep (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: appears to be a perfectly legitimate dab page, unless someone asserts that one or other of the two articles "Contracts of Employment (Indigenous Workers) Convention" is the primary topic. Pam  D  07:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: It is a legitimate disambiguation page. Similar to how Timber Mountain is a legitimate one too. --MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥) (please reply using &#x7B;&#x7B;ping&#x7D;&#x7D;) 07:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, since the parenthetical phrase is part of the name of each of the topics listed on the dab page. I question whether "(shelved)" is actually part of the title of the documents, but that's not relevant to the titling of the dab page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Except for the bureaucratically long titles, this looks like a normal dab page. If it gets tagged again, it's easy to revert. — Gorthian (talk) 21:07, 7 September 2016 (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.