Talk:Old Mission State Park

National Register of Historic Places High‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Idaho Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Idaho portal This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (assessed as High-importance).

Photos

Photos and/or photo uploads are needed.

HABS photos may be available for this site.
NRHP photos from 1975 linked in article are taken by NPS employee, hence may be public domain and can be used.
New photos would be helpful.

Merging

There is also an article called Old Mission State Park with substantially greater information. It was my thought that the articles be merged, with consistancy to the Wikipedia guidelines. "Vatsun | Talk" 03:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not notice this posting until just now, after I noticed the Cataldo Mission article was wiped out to redirect to Old Mission State Park, and after I just posted some objection to abruptness of such change at User talk:Vatsun#Cataldo Mission / Old Mission State Park. Since there was Vatsun's notice here, it was not as abrupt as I perceived it. However, the Old Mission State Park article was brand new on March 30, and I do not feel it had "substantially greater" information, that rubs me the wrong way. Who are you to say what you wrote is "greater" than the sources and info and pictures I and another editor had put into Cataldo Mission article? The merger as implemented wipes out the edit history in the pre-existing article, which is counter to usual practice as i know it. The new material should have been added to the pre-existing article, in my view.

Also, although there was this talk comment, it is customary as far as i know to make a proposal using mergeto and mergefrom tags, and secure a consensus before wiping out other peoples' work.

I've asked for Vatsun to comment, please. I currently want to get an administrator's help and reverse the way this was done. doncram (talk) 03:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was the merger comment also posted to the Cataldo Mission article? I thought it was on my watchlist, so I would have noticed if it were. I do like the new pics, but would have kept the old ones in the article as well. We did spend some time reviewing options and choosing it. I object to the loss of edit history. I don't otherwise object to a merger. Coming from the wikiworld of National Historic Landmarks and Registered Historic Places, I like to have an article that uses the name of the landmark as the title. Lvklock (talk) 03:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you may be upset by the way the merger was done, and I am sorry that it was done incorrectly. The only reason that I took out the other picture is because it was very similar to the color picture of the church. I felt that since Old Mission State Park had more information, it would be easier to merge Cataldo into Old Mission State Park. I also understand that since National Historic Landmark takes precedence over state park, it could go the other way. I would not mind if it was undone, as long as the two articles are merged and all of the information is kept. "Vatsun | Talk" 17:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]