Talk:Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014

Article Name

A user changed the name of this article to remove the bill identifier because they wrongly believed disambiguation was not necessary. This is false. There are two separate bills called "Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014". One is a House bill (H.R. 2609), which this article is about. The other is a Senate bill (S. 1245), which currently does not have an article. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME BILL. The contents are different due to different spending priorities between the Republican-led House and the Democrat-led Senate. The bill number is necessary in the title to disambiguate - that's why I put it there in the first place. Thank you. HistoricMN44 (talk) 18:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I've moved it back, and here's why: the bills both relate to each other (same topic) - even if the specific provisions are different. Both the House version and the Senate version should be discussed in the same article. Neutrality^talk 19:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

I still disagree with this change. The edits you made conflated H.R. 2609 with S. 1245 and they are NOT THE SAME BILL. You had procedural history about H.R. 2609 (when it arrived in the Senate, what the president had to say about) under a section heading indicating it was about S. 1245. I'm sure this was an honest mistake, but it is exactly one of the reasons why it makes sense to have two articles - to make sure information about one bill isn't incorrectly mixed in with the other. You are also assuming that the debate about the bills will be the same. It is possible - even likely - that organizations will love the House version and hate the Senate version and vice versa. In any event, I fixed the error and I'll be leaving the title as it is - I don't want to get in an edit war about it. I'm glad someone else has an interest in having quality coverage of major legislation on wikipedia. HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Additional sources

In response to a proposed deletion of this article, I'm adding a list of proposed additional sources that can be incorporated into this article (which I will begin to do soon).

• House Republican Conference's legislative digest on the bill - the GOP's summary of what's in it - provides background and political context
• Veto threat from the President and a list of changes they want - background, political context, info on alternative proposals, and different goals party to party
• Environment & Energy Publishing's news report on the bill
• Bloomberg Business News article on the bill
• National Electrical Contractors Association's news on the bill and their advocacy during the process
• Association of California Water Agencies News on the bill
• For Constructions Pros news on the bill

This article was originally written on July 9th, once it was known that the bill would be on the House floor, so that people could find out information about the bill from a neutral source, before it was passed. Most of these sources are from a few days later, so they couldn't be used at the time. A quick google search reveals that this proposed law is very notable - it would spend billions of dollars, so that matters to people. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I have now expanded the article and added a number of references (was at 5, now at 16). I have not used either of these, if you still want to add them:

• Veto threat from the President and a list of changes they want - background, political context, info on alternative proposals, and different goals party to party
• Environment & Energy Publishing's news report on the bill

Thanks, HistoricMN44 (talk) 18:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130702032536/http://majorityleader.gov:80/floor/weekly.html to http://www.majorityleader.gov/Floor/weekly.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:48, 24 December 2016 (UTC)