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)
Notwithstanding the above merge discussion, I think this article and Municipality should be merged. I'm not saying to which one, but I think they should be merged. I'm not sure how these two articles got forked, but they really seem to be about the same thing—at least in intent, even if the content is different. Any thoughts? Darkest TreeTalk 18:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Municipal corporation seems to be a name for the governing body of a municipality. But the term municipality can refer both to an administrative division (area) with its own governing body, and to the governing body itself. Since a locality or settlement without governing body is not a real municipality, the two concepts are almost synonymous. I propose merging into municipality since that is the more generic and normal word. Bever (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Support, as before; if the topic grows enough to support two articles, it can be split again. Just be sure there are no circular links this time! bd2412T 02:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Oppose The terms are not synonymous at all: the distinction between an administrative division and a governing body can be crucial, particularly in countries like India where municipal corporations and other types of administrative divisions can share the same name but operate within totally different boundaries: compare the revenue district South Delhi, which has existed since 1997, with the much more expansive South Delhi Municipal Corporation created in 2012. Cobblet (talk) 07:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)