This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Oppose - It's true they are both somewhat short, however a charter which establishes a government corporation is a significantly different concept than the gov't corp itself. However, I would not be bashful about just duplicating some material and creating a section in each for it. I think both articles will grow standing on their own.Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 01:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know, they've both been around for over four years, and this is as far as either has gotten. bd2412T 02:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Concur (conditionally) A municipal corporation and a municipal charter, while separate, can only exist in combination, for it is the charter theat creates the corporation. As long as no information is lost, I would propose that the charter be made a section of the corporation. I'm feeling bold, especially since discussion hasn't taken place on this in at least a couple of weeks Shentino (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
How about we merge them for now, and then break them out into separate articles if the information is expanded enough to merit separate articles? bd2412T 19:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I have done just that. In fact, I was about to post the news here about my WP:BOLD edit when I got into an edit conflict with you. Take a look and see if you like what I did? Shentino (talk) 19:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I just now undid the merger. I was looking for the topic of "municipal charter" (which I believe is a topic distinct from municipal corporation) and found that Charter#Municipal charter directs the reader to this as the main article. Rather than maintaining circular redirect loops, I'm restoring this article. --Orlady (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)