User:Ethanpak/sandbox

Article evaluation
- When evaluating an article it is first important to view the "Talk Page" to understand current edits, other editors, etc.

- To see if an article is credible, look to its sources. If the sources are not reliable (blogs, non-peer reviewed journals, etc.), then the article needs more editing.

- Articles can range in their completeness. If an article's information is scarce, the article needs more work and is probably not the most credible/reliable.

- You must source as much as you can when editing a Wikipedia page. Sourcing correctly is also important (do not directly copy, avoid long quotes, avoid plagiarism, etc.) Also, try to find sources that are credible. This includes independent academic journals, journals that have been peer reviewed, or other established Wikipedia pages

- When editing, use the "pencil" icon on the top right hand side and primarily use visual editor. You can change the text by either bolding, italicizing, etc. on the top of the page.

- Before making any changes on Wikipedia pages, it is important to consult past editors through the talk pages. Always respond with an additional semi-colon and sign using four "~"

- Link to talk page for article evaluation: Talk:Civic technology

Possible articles to work on

 * Article title: Voter suppression in the United States
 * Article Evaluation: The article about voter suppression in the United States is very comprehensive and covers important historical and contemporary forms of voter suppression. There are also many varied, yet reliable sources and the talk page shows many editors continuing to edit and work on this article. Yet, I would specifically work to include examples of voter suppression during gubernatorial elections rather than just federal ones. Additionally, I would like to add to the topic of voter suppression during the pandemic to include both arguments for and against mail-in voting, as this article does not go into much detail about the exact argument for vote-by mail.
 * Link to Article: Voter suppression in the United States

Option 2

 * Article title: Electronic voting in Estonia
 * Article Evaluation: For such a specific topic, I was surprised to see a large list of sources that were relatively recent and a strong summary of of the online voting systems within America. The talk pages revealed, though, that there had been only one editor of the article and it has not been interacted with since. That being said, while the article is pretty strong, I would like to specify the type of infrastructure Estonia had to create for this online voting system to come to fruition, as the article does not go into detail about the "public key infrastructure" that was created. Furthermore, I would include a section comparing Estonia's i-voting system to other developed nation's voting systems. And finally, I would like to balance the article further by including a section that lists the supporters of this voting system rather than just the critiques (which is currently included in the article).
 * Link to Article: Electronic voting in Estonia

Option 3

 * Article title: Political polarization in the United States
 * Article Evaluation: While the article was generally concise, there were many solid sources that were both relevant and credible, which highlights how well crafted this article is to begin with. That being said, I would like to add to the page to give an overview of the history of how the two-party system came to fruition in the United States, as I believe it is necessary to understand when talking about our current polarizing climate (among Democrats and Republicans). Although this would be a pretty large undertaking, as the two-party system is quite complex, it is necessary to give the proper context for this article. Finally, I would also add another subsection in the "effects" section to include increased public animosity, as it highlights the real-life effects of polarization within our society.
 * Link to Article: Political polarization in the United States

Article Contribution Ideas
The article I am editing is "Political Polarization in the United States." While I originally thought to create a section of the formation of the two-party system and its effects on polarization, I could not find many articles and studies to include in this particular edit. So I decided that it would be more interesting and useful to include a section about solutions to political polarization in America, as the article talks about causes and effects, but not solutions. Furthermore, I would also include a section that highlights the current most polarizing political issues, as I believe it would allow for the readers to see real-life implications and examples of polarization in this country.

Sources to use:


 * 1) "What are the solutions to Political Polarization?"
 * 2) Solutions to Political Polarization in America
 * 3) "Partisan Differences Growing on a Number of Issues"
 * 4) As Economic Concerns Recede, Environmental Protection Rises on the Public’s Policy Agenda
 * 5) "The Impact of Increased Political Polarization"
 * 6) "Political Polarization in the American Public"
 * 7) "Most continue to say ensuring health care coverage is government’s responsibility"
 * 8) "Political polarization drives online conversations about COVID-19 in the United States"
 * 9) "Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins"
 * 10) "Should America Be Worried About Political Violence? And What Can We Do to Prevent It?"

Solutions to Political Polarization
The United States is currently more politically divided now than it has been in the past twenty years. Not only is there less collaboration and mutual understanding between Democrats and Republicans, but members of both political parties increasingly view each other in an extremely negative way. As a result, partisan politics has begun to shape the relationships individuals have with others, as an overwhelming majority of Republicans and almost 50% of Democrats surround themselves with friends who share similar political views. Additionally, increased animosity and distrust among American politicians and citizens can be attributed to the increased skepticism of Americans institutions - a problem that is extremely catalyzed by political polarization. As polarization creates a less than ideal political climate, scholars have proposed multiple solutions to fix or mitigate the effects of the political polarization in the United States.

A commonly proposed solution is voting process reform, yet there are multiple ideas on how to reform this system. With the focus on increasing voter turnout to elect more moderate representatives in Congress, electoral expert Elaine Kamarck explains that abolishing closed primaries may invite independents or individuals from the opposing political party to vote for a representative other than their registered party's candidate. In doing so, the strict ideological divides may subside, allowing for more moderate representatives to be elected. Thus, as a result there would be an increasing ideological overlap in Congress and less polarization. Kamarck also proposes instituting a nationwide voting process like "California's top-two method," where there is only one general election for all political parties, and the top two candidates advance into the general election. Once again, this process is meant to elect more moderates into government, but it should be noted, that there is no evidence that this has happened quite yet. Finally, another electoral reform solution comes in the form of proportional voting, where congressional seats are divided based on the percentage of people who voted for a specific political party. For instance, if Democrats won 20% of the vote, they would receive 20% of the congressional seats. While this solution may not end polarization in the American political system, it may make it harder for the extreme ideologies to dictate the conversation.

Shifting to a more societal-based solution, social psychologists state that more social contact with those holding opposing political views may allow help mitigate political polarization. Focusing specifically on the creation of "Citizens Assemblies," the idea is to create a space where representatives and citizens are encouraged to discuss political topics and issues in a constructive fashion, hopefully resulting in compromise or mutual understanding. Yet, intergroup contact, as psychologists warn, must be created within specific parameters in order to create meaningful change. These boundaries, which make actual social implementation difficult, including a constant, meaningful dialogue between multiple members of each group.

Politically Polarizing Issues
As of February 2020, a study conducted by the Pew Research Center highlights the current political issues that have the most amount partisanship. By far, addressing climate change was the most partisan issue with only 21% of Republicans considering it a top policy priority as opposed to 78% of Democrats. Issues that are also extremely partisan include protecting the environment, reforming gun policy, and bolstering the country's military strength. These differences in policy priorities emerge as both Democrats and Republicans shift their focus away from improving the economy. Since 2011, both parties have gradually placed economic stimulation and job growth lower on their priority list, with Democrats experiencing a sharper decline of importance when compared to Republicans.

Furthermore, a poll conducted by Gallup identifies issues where the partisan gap has significantly increased over a period of about fifteen years. For Republicans, the most significant shift was the idea that the "federal government has too much power," with 39% of Republicans agreeing with that notion in 2002 as opposed to 82% agreeing in 2016. On the Democratic side, the largest shift was increasing favorability towards Cuba, changing from 32% in 2002 to 66% in 2017. Ultimately, as partisanship continues to permeate and dominate policy, citizens who adhere and align themselves with political parties become increasingly polarized. Yet, even where there are issues with a wide public consensus, partisan politics still divides citizens. For instance, even though 60% of Americans believe that the government should provide healthcare for its citizens, opinions are split among party lines with 85% of Democrats, including left-leaning independents, believing that healthcare is the government's responsibility and 68% of Republicans believe that it is not the government's responsibility.

Political polarization has also shaped the public's reaction to COVID-19. A study that observed the online conversations surrounding the Coronavirus pandemic found that left-leaning individuals were more likely to criticize politicians compared to right-leaning users. Additionally, left-leaning social media accounts often shared health prevention measures through hashtags, while right-leaning posts were more likely to spread conspiracies and retweet posts from The White House's Twitter account. The study continues to explain that, when considering geographic location, because individuals in conservative and right leaning areas are more likely to see the Coronavirus as a non-threat, they are less likely to stay home and follow health guidelines.

Political violence (Editing Existing Sub-Topic)
Some authors have found a correlation between polarization of political discourse and the prevalence of political violence. For instance, Rachel Kleinfeld, an expert on the rule of law and post-conflict governance, writes that political violence is extremely calculated and, while it may appear "spontaneous," it is the culmination of years of "discrimination and social segregation." Part of the problem lies in partisan politics, as partisanship in the political arena fosters partisan violence. In return, this increases polarization within the public, resulting in a public that ends up justifying political violence. Politicians may use political polarization as a weapon to further push existing institutions, which may also foster political violence. When applied to the United States, the current polarized climate may create conditions that can lead political violence within the country, unless there is meaningful reform. In fact, data shows that within three years, both Democrats and Republicans increasingly agree that political violence is at least "a little" justified as long as their party's political agenda are advanced. In 2017, only 8% of both Democrats and Republicans justified the use of political violence, but as of September of 2020, that number jumped to 33% and 36%, respectively.

Response to Peer Reviews
Rachel, thank you so much for your supportive feedback and kind words! Especially on the topic COVID, I just thought it would be an interesting topic to include because of the severity of the situation and its uniquely politicized nature. Thank you for noticing it! Also, your answers to the questions were very direct and made your feedback even more simple to understand, so thank you for that as well.

Beril, thank you for taking the time to read over my article, and I find it incredibly interesting how we are covering the same topic, but in different areas of the world. It is so important to see how polarization can take different forms and lead to different effects depending on the location and culture! In regards, to your suggestions, I think that breaking down the historical section into further subgroups is intriguing and I will definitely look into that! I do worry, though, that there will not be enough information to make it its own subgroup, but I can research it. Additionally, adding a social media subgroup under "the media" is also a really intriguing suggestion, and one that I did not think of. I will try to research and create a separate paragraph(s) for this point and add it to my drafts! Thank you again.