Talk:Parliamentary procedure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Politics (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Parliamentary Procedure (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Parliamentary Procedure, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of parliamentary procedure 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 
Archive Index

Merge rationale[edit]

I've been requested to provide a rationale for the merger of parliamentary authority and parliamentary procedure. The content of "parliamentary authority" describes how these tomes are integrated into parliamentary procedure, and much of the content of "parliamentary procedure" describes which authorities are used where. It is unclear to me that there is a useful-to-readers dividing line between these two articles, given the 50%-75% overlap. -- Beland (talk) 07:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose merger: While there is some overlap, these are two different subjects. One is the overall body of law, the other is the type of book used in that body of law. Neutron (talk) 02:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose merger: Parliamentary procedure refers to the many processes themselves, while a parliamentary authority is a written work adopted by deliberative assemblies. These are separate concepts and should be kept separate. Squideshi (talk) 21:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose of the *Oppose merger*: and I bet you think your so smart hm? Merge them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.134.152 (talk) 16:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose merger: The publishers and the contents of the procedures are different subjects. Considering that the topic has already been broken down so there are individual articles on many various parts of parliamentary procedure and different parliamentary authorities, the parliamentary authority itself *must* also be broken out for consistency. See the {{Parliamentary Procedure}} navbox for plenty of examples. Ikluft (talk) 20:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose merger: Though I have nothing to add that hasn't been said above, here is my vote for the record. —ShinyG 23:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose The two topics seem different. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:18, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose merger: "Rules of Order" redirects to this page. Those are generic to all sorts of meetings eg. corporate and social. The Parliamentary Authority article seems to be aimed at how Governments (ie. Political bodies) do this -- a valid topic, but sheds no light on smaller, non-governmental boards of directors. It might increase the distinctiveness if this page were renamed "Rules of order", with "Parliamentary Procedure" as an alternate. "Governance" is not the same as "Government". 173.206.176.14 (talk) 15:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Broken WikiTrust by Absense of Link[edit]

The Application WikiTrust for FireFox, breaks when the link for 'Weinbergs..' is tripped upon.

WIll rever tif any objections, but until another solution is found, the removal of the broken link seems aapropriate at this time. Will follow up with what happened to 'Weinbergs..' in WIkipedia. Richard416282 (talk) 19:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)