Talk:Historian of the United States Senate

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merger

I think these two articles should be merged. They simply cover the same topic, with the historian being the head of the office. Neither article has a substantive amount of information and I think they would be better combined. --Daysleeper47 19:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree. This article is good where it is. It describes What this office does. It just simply mentions who the historian is. --Zonerocks 21:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but for instance, there is an article for the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives. Do we need another article for the Office of the Clerk because we have one on the person? No, the article on the clerk covers the office as well. Just my thoughts on it. --Daysleeper47 14:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Staff listing

Is the staff listing necessary? Hill staffing is a pretty fluid thing, with lots of turnover and our ability to keep it entirely up to date all the time is not possible. Further, do the staff even want to be listed? Just some things to consider... --Daysleeper47 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]