Talk:Federal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For a disambiguation page, this contanis too much text imo. Wouter Lievens 1 July 2005 14:22 (UTC)

I agree. I belive there is enough content for the info here to form an article (ie remove the dab tag) and for Federal (disambiguation) to be created.--Commander Keane 19:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

maybe we don't need a dab page? there is a see also section Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:49, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

You'd need Federal style architecture and Federal (Amtrak) in a top dab - not a see also. I'm cool with that though, I was thinking there might be another one (3 is really pushing it for a top dab) but if there are only two then no dab is needed. --Commander Keane 23:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Agree with CK on this one. The meaning given in the article is so massively dominant that a disam page would be a distraction - better to fix links from those few articles that intend the other meaning. A top dab would be fine, even if there are three pages in it. Soo 19:00, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

But what would such an article cover that isn't already covered in federalism? D-Rock (Yell at D-Rock) 03:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps nothing. Maybe even a redirect would be sensible. Soo 18:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Confederacy

...does not mean the Conf states of America. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirection

from foederal and fœderal, how do you do it?