JosephLMarques (talk | contribs) Update Censorship and Information Control During Information Revolutions assignment details Tag: dashboard.wikiedu.org [2.0] |
194.207.146.167 (talk) {{American politics AE}} |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Copied |from=Voter suppression|from_oldid=588139549|to=Voter suppression in the United States|diff=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States&oldid=590176116}} |
{{Copied |from=Voter suppression|from_oldid=588139549|to=Voter suppression in the United States|diff=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States&oldid=590176116}} |
||
{{American politics AE}} |
|||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
||
{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=low|USGov=yes|USGov-importance=}} |
{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=low|USGov=yes|USGov-importance=}} |
Revision as of 23:31, 6 November 2018
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Template:Findsourcesnotice This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jvaldez0341 (article contribs). This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rseplow (article contribs).
NPOV: More balanced examples or address the issue?
Most of the categories in this article use an example of the US Republican party doing the misdeed in question. This article would be improved by using examples from across the US political spectrum. As an alternative, some non-partisan (which probably means non-US) discussion of why the examples lean heavily toward one party might be in order.RJB9000 (talk) 00:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
- @RJB9000: Have you found any examples of voter suppression by other groups in United States elections? Jarble (talk) 17:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Democrats, being in dense metropolitan areas, are more into voter inflation, rather than suppression. Hard to prove a voter doesn't exist, or was alive at the time of the election, or not an American citizen, or legalizing illegals then using motor-voter to "legally" (?) register them, etc. etc. Oppose ids. That sort of thing. Student7 (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- Check out WP:GEVAL. Complying with NPOV does not require false balance. The fact that most of the examples given are of Republican actions simply reflects the fact that in the modern era, only one party is engaging in voter suppression. 207.98.198.84 (talk) 05:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- The other is involved in voter "encouragement" through such measures as moter-voter, which (ultimately) allows illegal immigrants to vote and stuffing the ballot box. Works in densely populated areas. Student7 (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- This article is about the distinct concept of "voter suppression", which appears to be discussed in enough reliable sources to satisfy Wikipedia's notability guideline. If you know of enough reliable sources discussing the concept of "voter inflation" or "voter encouragement" to satisfy notability, feel free to write an article about it (although what you're describing sounds like it already falls within the scope of the existing article on electoral fraud). Regardless, the National Voter Registration Act (motor voter) does not allow immigrants to vote; immigrant voter registration and voting in federal elections are criminally prohibited by 18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) and 18 U.S.C. § 611, respectively, and every state has its own analogous bans. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 19:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Actually, almost all the examples are not examples of "voter suppression", but of discouraging or removing those who are not eligible to vote from voting. The concept of "voter suppression" as a propaganda term seems appropriate for Wikipedia, but examples are not known to exist. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- This article is about the distinct concept of "voter suppression", which appears to be discussed in enough reliable sources to satisfy Wikipedia's notability guideline. If you know of enough reliable sources discussing the concept of "voter inflation" or "voter encouragement" to satisfy notability, feel free to write an article about it (although what you're describing sounds like it already falls within the scope of the existing article on electoral fraud). Regardless, the National Voter Registration Act (motor voter) does not allow immigrants to vote; immigrant voter registration and voting in federal elections are criminally prohibited by 18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) and 18 U.S.C. § 611, respectively, and every state has its own analogous bans. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 19:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- The article omits any reference to the 2008 voter suppression by the New Black Panthers at multiple voting locations in Philadelphia. The article also omits more than 400 instances of voter fraud in the 2012 presidential election in North Carolina, where most of the fraudulent cases involved illegal immigrants voting.
- With respect to Texas, one can refer to Robert Karo's research about voting in Texas border counties during Lyndon Johnson's many campaigns there. In some of those precincts, fraudulent voting by illegal voters or even by Mexican residents has been a regular occurrence for many decades. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JP734 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
- The article should either be more neutrally named (voting reduction?), or restricted to only those methods which are of questionable legality or morality. Among the specific types, only "disinformation", inadequate (not "inequality of") election resources, and "Jim Crow" laws fall into that category. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:31, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Claiming that things like motor-voter laws "ultimately allows illegal immigrants to vote" is off-the-wall nonsense. 207.98.198.84 (talk) 05:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The other is involved in voter "encouragement" through such measures as moter-voter, which (ultimately) allows illegal immigrants to vote and stuffing the ballot box. Works in densely populated areas. Student7 (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Does this page belong in Category:Political repression in the United States?
@Arthur Rubin: Recently, this page was removed from Category:Political repression in the United States, since it was identified as being a "clearly inappropriate category" for this article. Is it inaccurate to describe voter suppression as a form of political repression, and should this article be placed in a different category instead? Jarble (talk) 04:24, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
- It's fairly clear the article should not exist at all in its present state, as it is now being used as a propaganda page to imply that making it more difficult for someone to vote is "voter suppression", without consideration of whether the person is eligible to vote. In any case, it's not "political repression". — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:38, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
- The current quality of this article's content aside, the topic refers to the idea of denying eligible persons the right to vote. But that is neither here nor there. Can you elaborate as to how, exactly, this concept isn't "political repression"? It appears to be a "clearly appropriate" category to me. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 07:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- It's a matter of definition. The definitions of both terms need to bo modified, in order for it to match. It's certainly not persecution, and often it is difficult to determine the group "repressed" — it's not the group discouraged from voting. I'm not sure it should match, but the definitions in both articles need to be changed — even if any of the body of this article is appropriate. I've taken the first step in fixing the definitions, in this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Making it more difficult for someone to vote is voter suppression. This is kind of a basic definitional thing. And yes, this article most certainly belongs in Category:Political repression in the United States. 207.98.198.84 (talk) 05:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Making it more difficult for people ineligible to vote to actually vote is not "political repression", by any stretch of the imagination. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. And declining to have an article which documents dead people voting in cities, busing to vote at multiple sites, stuffing ballot boxes, moter-voter (which makes no specific sense except that it rhymes) and other things that Democrats do or have done to inflate the vote. pov article. Student7 (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Student7 and Arthur Rubin: There have been no discussions on this talk page for several months. Is it OK to remove the cleanup tags now? Jarble (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. And declining to have an article which documents dead people voting in cities, busing to vote at multiple sites, stuffing ballot boxes, moter-voter (which makes no specific sense except that it rhymes) and other things that Democrats do or have done to inflate the vote. pov article. Student7 (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
- Making it more difficult for people ineligible to vote to actually vote is not "political repression", by any stretch of the imagination. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
- The title is faulty IMO (WP:POV). There are articles on only two countries, the US and Canada, probably among the 25 countries least likely to suppress legitimate voting. Unless there is a project to chronicle voter suppression in "developing" world countries, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and the like, the title should be changed.
- Maybe manipulation of elections/voting? This would include both parties attempts, including motor-voter, gerrymandering by Democrats as well as Republicans, etc. In short, it would be an npov title containing information documenting both sides' attempts to doctor the voting lists to get more votes. Not just one-sided. Student7 (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- I thought I replied already. In addition to most of the examples, both general and specific, not meeting the definition added to the lede, there is almost unanimous support for the statement that there are serious problems with the article. The particular tag under discussion may not be the right one, but there needs to be something there. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- The current quality of this article's content aside, the topic refers to the idea of denying eligible persons the right to vote. But that is neither here nor there. Can you elaborate as to how, exactly, this concept isn't "political repression"? It appears to be a "clearly appropriate" category to me. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 07:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
To the OP: Yes, it should be under that category. It's not political repression to prevent the ineligible from voting, but several examples (e.g., creating ridiculously long wait times or robocalling people suggesting they relax and stay home) indiscriminately affect the eligible and ineligible.
It's fair to suggest though that the Democratic equivalent (voter inflation) be merged with this article - or at least referenced from it - so as not to give the false impression that this issue is one-sided. 118.208.94.79 (talk) 21:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Voter suppression in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100115215953/http://www.dallasnews.com:80/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-voterid_11tex.ART0.State.Edition2.4ac6919.html to http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-voterid_11tex.ART0.State.Edition2.4ac6919.html
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110724050001/http://www.reformelections.org/feature.asp?menuid= to http://www.reformelections.org/feature.asp?menuid=
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080912005439/http://www.americanchronicle.com:80/articles/16105 to http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/16105
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 18 January 2022).
- 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
POV tags from 2014 citing recentism removed
POV tags are not meant to be a permanent fixture for any article on Wikipedia. There has been no further discussion, nor did there seem to be a WP:Consensus in favor of the tag in the first place, according to it's relative TP section NPOV: More balanced examples or address the issue? This tag is about 3 years old, so there has been more than enough time for the editor(s) that placed this tag to have addressed any issues they saw as POV. The tag also cites WP:RECENTISM, but due to the extensive history of this term, I believe it has passed the ten year test WP:10YT. If any editor still feels that certain aspects of this article are still POV, please address them here, or better yet, fix them, instead of just putting the tag back on. That is just lazy editing IMO, and could also be construed as using the POV tag inappropriately as a sort of "badge of shame".
See WP:ACHIEVE NPOV, "As a general rule, do not remove sourced information from the encyclopedia solely on the grounds that it seems biased. Instead, try to rewrite the passage or section to achieve a more neutral tone. Biased information can usually be balanced with material cited to other sources to produce a more neutral perspective, so such problems should be fixed when possible through the normal editing process."DN (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Do you have any examples? Nobody seems to be able to find any examples of Democrats suppressing the vote? Do such examples exist, or are Republicans the only ones suppressing the vote? Nobody wants to update this section.Scorpions13256 (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- There are examples already in the article of "Dem" voter suppression. See Jim Crow laws. Of course, things have changed since then. DN (talk) 19:18, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
POV tags again
SEE [1]. this page reads like a progressive hate screed and much of it's "findings" have been debunked on Politifact and Snopes.com)". I have removed this tag because being WP:TRIGGERED is not reason enough to cite a POV claim. If you have citations that dispute anything in this article, I kindly request you share them with the rest of us before using tags again. DN (talk) 02:59, 7 December 2017 (UTC)