Talk:Virginia's congressional districts

message: remaining at 11 seats?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.43.222 (talk) 18:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why is this page so horribly vague and poorly notated? It's atrocious to read and unforgivingly convoluted to use. You can't find your congressional House member and the vast majority is antiquated crap about people that haven't served in years. I would expect better, but, living in Virginia, I know that such ideal of "better" will never surface. "Dilapidated" is probably the best description that most properties and congressional ideals could ever live up to. 96.238.184.90 (talk) 10:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010? 

message: The 2016 court-ordred redistricting per http://redistricting.dls.virginia.gov/2010/court-ordered-redistricting.aspx and http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/273764-supreme-court-weighs-legality-of-virginia-redistricting will be important this year.  The Plan 16 map is  Drf5n (talk) 04:38, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2016 court-ordered redistricting 

message: Thank you for your contributions to this article. I have made several recent contributions and note that it previously had more material than several other articles rated start-class "[state] congressional districts”. I have promoted the article to B-class for the Wikipedia Project Virginia; it takes two other editors to promote an article to A-class. Further comments and contributions are welcome. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:19, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article rating 

message: For reference, the B-class article criteria is found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria:
1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as  is optional. 2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. 4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. 6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
The A-class article criteria is found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/A-Class criteria:
An A-Class article should approach the standards for a Featured article (FA), but will typically fall short because of minor style issues. The article may need minor copyedits, but it should be comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and well-written. A peer review by project editors should find the article to be a viable candidate for FA status. Assessing an article as A-Class requires more than one reviewer. There are two methods available for doing this.
* Basic method: For WikiProjects without a formal A-Class review process, the proposal to promote to A-Class should be made on the article's talk page. To be granted, the proposal should be supported by two uninvolved editors, with no significant opposes. The review should also be noted on the project's discussion page. 
Thanks in advance for any comments and contributions towards advancing the article further. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-class criteria to A-class status 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alabama's congressional districts which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 18:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: I've uploaded the previous congressional map under obsolete districts. This adds the previous wiki picture under the statewide tab: :commons:File:VA_2016_Redistricting.png. I thought it was better than nothing, but just noting that it is inconsistent with the previous map, and lacks the Norfolk highlight. Sb101FV (talk) 04:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsolete Districts - District boundaries 2017-2023