Talk:Timeline of voting rights in the United States

What is the purpose of this page?
The contents are essentially copied and pasted from Voting rights in the United States. I would suggest that we either greatly shorten the timeline on that page, or that we delete this page. Otherwise this page serves no purpose. — M ETS 501 (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Mets, the inention is to have the major milestones on Voting rights in the United States, which is currently about the right length. There is much more that can be added to a complete timeline however. Given how much material there is to understand on voting rights in the United States, I expect a Timeline article will be beneficial for readers and will be expanded over time. Let's give it a chance to develop, and see how the artcile improves? Whizz40 (talk) 09:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Right now, though, Voting rights in the United States is essentially a timeline, albeit it's broken into different parts. That being said, some of the things on this list are pretty suspect in terms of their actual effect on voting rights, like when George W. Bush extended the act in 2006. (I'm glad it was extended, but extending an act doesn't make a difference in voting rights in the country.) — M ETS 501 (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's it, there is a lot of prose broken into different parts and there is confusion about the dates and chronological order of events, even in the contents of articles and thus among editors and readers because it had not been corrected. For example when I first looked at Jacksonian democracy the dates regarding voting rights needed clarification in places, events were stated in the article to have happened earlier than sources (added to the article) say they did. Similarly on Universal suffrage, the U.S. section needed some clarifications to dates. Further improvements are always possible and based on this I see a real need for an accurate chronological summary. Whizz40 (talk) 20:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @Mets501 This page is a valuable simplification and summary of the other page. It does need to be updated to 2023. 172.56.232.93 (talk) 17:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Lies & Distortions of History to advance an agenda
It is a lie and distortion of history...contradicted in this very page...that only "white land-owning males" could vote in 1789.

This is contradicted a mere two sentences down ON THIS VERY PAGE!

Also, several states allowed free men of ALL races to vote in 1789.

This "citation" is a lie, a distortion, and a fundamental injustice to Americans of all races. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.150.176.235 (talk) 01:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm wondering, did some individual add these unsourced remarks about "poor whites"?Ramseyman (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sources added to the article. Whizz40 (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Better source needed
While technically you are right that this website is not a reliable source, were any of the entries disputed or controversial? The website does list a number of sources and I don't see any reason to think the facts are unreliable based on my knowledge. It therefore seems we might be able to keep the content provided the facts themselves are not challenged? I am wondering if you are willing to consider restoring the text. Whizz40 (talk) 07:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking this to talk. I agree with you that we should not remove claims just because the source is not a scholarly one. But the claim that women loose the right to vote implies that they could vote before. Women voting in the British colonies in the 18th century ? This would turn the ideas I (and perhaps other people) have about the 18th century upside down. That's why I think a better source is needed, and I'd be really happy to be proven wrong, i.e. to learn something new. There is another problem: Massachusetts got a new constitution in 1780, but lizlibrary doesn't make a connection between the loss of women's voting rights and the new constitution. That's why I fear that the constitution of 1780 just made an older custom or an older law explicit. --Rsk6400 (talk) 08:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, thanks. These points do seem to need better sources and better articulation within the article. Whizz40 (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Moving information from Timeline of voting rights in the United States
Hi! I just wanted to talk to you about re-adding the information I moved to the other article, Voting rights in the United States. Those items are a better fit there because they are not framed as specific times, unlike the rest of the timeline. If you would prefer to reformat that section, I say leave it, but otherwise, I think it's best on the other page. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, thanks for explaining. But I think the content should be on this article otherwise important material is missing. If you prefer reformatting, that could be fine, but I don't think bullets and sub-bullets covering an extended period is a big issue if it is the best way to present the material. What do you think? Whizz40 (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Both Vermont and Kentucky are mentioned in the source - please check you latest edit. Whizz40 (talk) New States Vermont none (1791) Kentucky none (1792) Whizz40 (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'm correcting. When I did a search, I didn't find Kentucky. But I'm looking in Engerman and Sokoloff. I wish the original timeline had chopped up the states into discreet dates. I appreciate your double checking things! It's a huge topic and the list is missing a lot of stuff. :( Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)