This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is redirected to United States congressional delegations from Utah. All information in this article is included in its own section in the delegations from Utah page. According to WP:Redirect under the purposes of redirect, you add a redirect when, "Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article. (Such redirects are often targeted to a particular section of the article.)" Bgwhite (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please see other Territorial delegations from other districts. The format I've been editing is consistent with those. I've redirected your page to the more appropriate Utah Congressional Delegations....Pvmoutside (talk) 15:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ALL information in the article is duplicated in the redirected (United States congressional delegations from Utah) article. The redirected article also includes MORE information. There is no reason to have two separate pages to maintain when having one is better... plus the redirect includes more information for the reader. In addition, the redirected articles is a Featured List article. This is all consistent with WP:Redirect.
Also, I use a targeted redirection. From WP:Redirect... It is also possible to create a targeted redirect, i.e. a redirect to a particular point on the target page – either a section header or an anchor. For example, Malia Obama redirects to Family of Barack Obama#Malia and Sasha Obama. Therefore, entering "Malia Obama" will bring the searcher straight to that section of the article Family of Barack Obama which deals with "Malia and Sasha Obama".
I may be wrong, but everything is consistent with what has been done on Wikipedia and WP:Redirect. You have yet to show proof that I am wrong or any evidence of your case. I've repeatedly asked for discussion on the talk page. This is the only time you've responded in four times. SHOW PROOF.
Why are you so against this?? The redirect gives the reader more information and the editor less work by only editing one page. Bgwhite (talk) 22:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't put me down on my talk page. It is unprofessional. No I'm not "fairly new". I have been told many times that there is no "standard" way to do articles, even articles that are in the same category. The Governor's lists was one place I was told this... Governor articles is one place I work to bring upto FL standards. Where does it say on Wikipedia that there is a "standard" to follow for articles in a category? I just don't know why you want an article with less information and more confusion? Bgwhite (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
