Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Survivors' Insurance (Agriculture) Convention, 1933 (shelved)


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  08:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Survivors' Insurance (Agriculture) Convention, 1933 (shelved)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability asserted whatsoever, no sourcing found Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 00:33, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 00:33, 18 January 2018 (UTC)


 *  Redirect Comment possibly redirect to List of International Labour Organization Conventions. This was a notable convention, however there currently isn't enough independent, seconday/tertiary reliable sourcing in the article. There isn't anything to merge that isn't already in the list. However, a quick search finds numerous mentions under " Convention concerning compulsory invalidity insurance for persons employed in agricultural undertakings "[see corrected alternative search above], and I think a WP:HEY may be possible. Smmurphy(Talk) 00:43, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm changing my !vote to a comment. do you mind explaining your WP:BEFORE and why you think this article should be deleted in spite of what you did or didn't find, given that it was a major international labor convention? Smmurphy(Talk) 00:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Invalidity Insurance (Agriculture) Convention is a different convention, C038. This here is C040. --Lambiam 23:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You are right, a possible alternative search should be: "Convention concerning Compulsory Widows' and Orphans' Insurance for Persons Employed in Agricultural Undertakings". Smmurphy(Talk) 23:40, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep but tag -- As a former international convention (treaty), albeit a defunct one that was ratified by a few countries, this is a notable topic. The present article is a poor stub, but that is not a reason for deletion.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have 20 articles on shelved International Labour Organization conventions; it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily bomb one of them – and in any case, even if the content is merged into a more general article on ILO conventions, we need to keep a redirect; the operation will not require deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambiam (talk • contribs) 23:29, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 06:04, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep my understanding is that this is notable. It is an international treaty, and notability is not temporary. Ilyina Olya Yakovna (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * delete Sourcing on this continues to be an issue that I'm finding insurmountable. It's obvious that this would have a place in some list having to do with certain labor issues; it's referred to over and over in works on social security. The problem is, to be blunt, nobody ever talks about what it says. Even the article doesn't say what it says, with or without sourcing. I'm guessing that a lot of the other conventions in the same categories suffer from similar faults, so appealing to them isn't helpful: this article needs to be justified on its own merits. Mangoe (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2018 (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.