Talk:Washington legislative districts

Untitled
Bot issues have been addressed, both in adding categories and ending orphan status. --Wikibojopayne (talk) 05:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

New Redirects
Greetings. unilaterally decided to move all of the legislative pages to redirects to this main page. The move went beyond the usual WP:BEBOLD. A lot of very important content has been removed without explanation. I searched their contributions and see no discussion or attempt at discussion before making the move. I am going to undo their edits. Reywas, I am hoping you can come here to provide an explanation for the change. Otherwise, let's stick to the way it's been. PrairieKid (talk) 18:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * There is discussion at Talk:Washington's 42nd legislative district. No, when there is not unique content on an article and it is wholly redundant to other articles, it is well within BEBOLD. I did not remove "a lot of very important content"; please tell me what "very important content" is at Washington's 13th legislative district. Information is already located at this overview article, for which further expansion is welcome, and the Washington State Senate and Washington State House. As mentioned on that talk page, I am planning to start a page similar to List of Representatives and Senators of Arizona Legislature by Districts (2013–2023) which will also include prose beyond the tables which include historical members of the legislature. The "way it's been" is a bunch of stubs that serve no purpose on their own, and a consolidated article with a table of contents and without duplication is much more useful. Reywas92Talk 19:01, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, I missed that discussion. My apologies--not sure how I skimmed over it. That said, even there, it did not look like you had consensus. It looked more like another editor did not like the idea but felt the project of fixing the articles was too great to take on. Further, you did initiate that discussion. It was only after a few users had asked for an explanation that you began to provide one. I think changing 50 1,000-4,500 character articles into redirects without any discussion is definitely(!) beyond the parameters of WP:BEBOLD. Further, that policy reminds you to not "be upset if your bold edits get reverted." Let's keep with the status quo unless consensus is reached otherwise.
 * Now, for the meat of the actual issue: first to your point on the 42nd district article. Now, that article is a stub. But it certainly has more information than your proposed list would. Further, there are several articles (the 40th being pointed out on your tp) which do have some valuable information and the potential for them is huge! I think it would be worth the continual effort of expanding those articles bit-by-bit rather than getting rid of them and the info they do provide altogether.
 * I appreciate you coming to the discussion now (and doing so before reverting). and  you both expressed interest in this discussion. What do you say now? I'll add that I am going to make these legislative articles a new pet project of mine, working on their expansion myself. PrairieKid (talk) 22:36, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So the majority of those articles' length is in the image, see also, reference, external links, and footers, so I believe merging a whopping three sentences of content already covered elsewhere is well within being bold. These were created six years ago with virtually no improvement since, so my expectation of little future expansion is not unreasonable. Washington's 42nd legislative district does NOT have more information than a proposed list of representatives: that list a la Arizona's would certainly include counties/cities in each district and a map in each section or a gallery (which is also in this main page).
 * I want to see improvement in WA politics articles and I would like to collaboratively contribute my efforts, but I do not want to waste my time on pages that have very low readership and which are duplicative of other articles. An Arizona-type article could even include election results (the info columns are currently unused and others wider than necessary) and of course prose about resignations and other information about what happened in the district. What do you plan to add to these articles, and do you think there is a way to present that in a more efficient way? Reywas92Talk 00:32, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of mountain passes in Washington (state) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of mountain passes in Washington (state) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)