User:Ryan (Wiki Ed)/Voter suppression planning

Page purpose
This page is for participants in the Wiki Education "Write to Vote" Advanced Wikipedia course. Between February 28 - March 27, we will be collaboratively working to apply Good Article criteria to the voter suppression in the United States article.

This page is for planning, coordination, and notes.

Feel free to create new sections, subsections, lists, etc. here. If a discussion, idea, proposal, or question would be useful for all participants to see, consider whether it would be better to post it here than on Slack (where it can more easily scroll off-screen). Please be bold in editing this page!

See also this page where we can collect relevant sources: User:Ryan (Wiki Ed)/Voter suppression sources.

Existing structure
1 Methods
 * DEFINITION
 * 1.1 Purging of voter rolls
 * 1.2 Limitations on early and absentee voting
 * 1.3 Voting procedure disinformation
 * 1.4 Caging lists
 * 1.5 Identification requirements
 * 2 Historical examples
 * 2.1 1838 Gallatin County Election Day Battle
 * 2.2 Jim Crow laws
 * 2.3 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal
 * 2.4 2004 presidential election
 * 2.5 2006 Virginia Senate election
 * 2.6 2008 presidential election
 * 2.6.1 Michigan
 * 2.6.2 Minnesota
 * 2.6.3 Pennsylvania
 * 2.6.4 Wisconsin
 * 2.7 2010 Maryland gubernatorial election
 * 2.8 2015 early voting controversy in Maryland
 * 2.9 2016 presidential election
 * 2.9.1 Kansas
 * 2.9.2 North Carolina
 * 2.9.3 North Dakota
 * 2.9.4 Ohio
 * 2.9.5 Wisconsin
 * 2.10 2017–2018
 * 2.10.1 Election Integrity Commission and Crosscheck
 * 2.10.2 Alabama
 * 2.10.2.1 Georgia
 * 2.10.3 Indiana
 * 2.10.4 North Dakota
 * 2.11 2019-2020
 * 2.11.1 Wisconsin
 * 3 Anti-suppression efforts
 * 4 See also
 * 5 References
 * 6 External links

Working outline
Should add "Definition" as a first section before Methods of Suppression.

Definition

Voter suppression is the term used to describe tactics used to create barriers or obstacles for the exercise of voting rights. An example would be a language barrier. Even though there are no longer English-language requirements, a local jurisdiction might not translate materials or provide language assistance. A more contemporary example is the use of online platforms to spread messages designed to impact turnout of targeted groups.

Methods might also add:

·     Provisional/Contested ballots (some say these are suppression, others say no)

·     Closure of voter locations/changes in voting processes?

·     Changes to the census?

·     Changes to timing/types of voter registration processes?

·     Primary caucuses?

Other GAs/FAs
These are some existing Good Articles (and Featured Articles) that may be helpful as models. None are perfect, but some deal with similar themes, similar degrees of breadth, similar kinds of sections, etc. Feel free to add to or annotate the list!


 * Voting Rights Act of 1965
 * Voting rights in Singapore
 * Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
 * Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (applying GA standards to this was the focus of the previous Advanced Wiki Scholars course)
 * Slavery in Haiti
 * Legal history of cannabis in the United States
 * Article 9 of the Constitution of Singapore
 * Article 12 of the Constitution of Singapore
 * Fundamental rights in India
 * Nuisance in English law
 * Food waste in the United Kingdom

Important note Many of these Good Article Reviews are quite old (fundamental rights in India, for example, dates back to 2006 and is now tagged as needing more sources), so may not be reflective of what a GA review currently looks like.

Coordinating: what are you interested in contributing? What are you not interested or unable to contribute?
Hopefully by now you've had time to look over the article and put some thought into what sections interest you (and perhaps what sections don't interest you). Maybe you've even noticed a missing section that you'd like to write. It would be helpful for the planning process if everyone responds to this thread with some ideas ASAP. Also feel free to include what resources you have access to if you're willing to look up sources at another person's request (example: Newspapers.com, NewspaperArchive.com, JSTOR, institutional access to a University library/resources, etc).

A talk page tip: don't forget to sign your posts with 4 tildes ( ~ ). For other talk page resources, you may find this page helpful. If you haven't already, it would be a good idea to watchlist this page and the Nineteenth Amendment article.

Betsy - I'll pull together some sources for definitions, as we really can't update the rest of this until after we know what "counts" as suppression. And I'll continue to add items to the resources page to help with filling in other sections.

Evaluation comments
This is Betsy's review of the article as of March 3rd:

Lead

Guiding questions


 * Does    the Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly     describes the article's topic? Perhaps too     concise. There’s a good link to the general voter suppression website that     has a more developed definition that might be copied/mimicked. Without a clear definition it's hard to determine what "fits" and what doesn't.
 * Does    the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, but we’ll be adding sections so it’ll be easier to     edit this afterwards
 * Does    the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No – it’s limited so hard to do this
 * Is    the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Too concise – needs more of an overview.
 * Link provided to general “suffrage” page via the “efforts to    enfranchise and disenfranchise” that might not be the best link to make.
 * Refers to Voting Rights in the US for basic eligibility    information -need to walk a line on this. How does “eligibility” tie to     suppression?

Lead evaluation

Content

Guiding questions


 * Is    the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Good topics under Methods. Might need to expand     content in some of these (esp early/absentee voting, caging lists). We should      figure out if/how provision/contested ballots are dealt with (tied to ID      or something else). Change of address dates, registration dates, etc –      make sure fully addressed. Rules related to turning in of forms from      voter registration drives by groups – new rules on this? (Florida      especially – ethnic disparities). Wesbury v Sanders. Same day registration?      Automatic registration. Limitations on voting locations, use of caucuses?      Discussion of attempts to skew the census (is this suppression or just Gerrymandering).      Role of ALEC and others to draft legislation that suppresses voters? Coca      Cola, Wal-Mart, others as funders of this?
 * Historical Examples – Huge jumps between 1838 to Jim     Crow to 2002. Need to fill in lots in the middle here. PA in 2008 is      perhaps too long. Some areas already have Wikipedia alerts regarding      content that need to be cleaned up/verified.
 * Anti-Suppression Efforts is very underdeveloped
 * Is    the content up-to-date? Some is current, but there     are laws passed and challenges to these laws/efforts that occurred in the past     2 years that are missing and could be updated.
 * Is    there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Need to do some more research on this, but there are     more states that have attempted to create laws or did create laws that are     not represented. There is no mention of ALEC or other groups acting in     coordinated ways to develop laws. Limited attention to court cases that     might be relevant Perhaps a Section on the     harms of voter suppression?

Content evaluation

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions


 * Is    the article neutral? Some sections appear to have     some bias in sources and/or tone. Once we have sections edited for content     we can address tone.
 * Are    there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? This is going to be hard, as in the last 50 years most     of the voter suppression has come from a more conservative/Republican     standpoint, but it was more from the Democrats before then. We’ll have to     use “neutral” sources even if the content places blame on more     conservative political interests.
 * Are    there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? A lot of the sources are newspapers, new organizations,     popular works rather than academic books and articles or government     reports and court proceedings. We would benefit from adding in more     scholarly/academic/expert works to support neutrality.
 * Does    the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or     away from another? It is biased in the direction     that “suppression” is wrong, which by definition it is. What we need to     figure out is how to address difference of opinion about whether something     is “suppression” or is making elections more fair, valid, honest, etc. How     do we know what is a suppressive action rather than a useful way to ensure     elections integrity?

Tone and balance evaluation

Sources and References

Guiding questions


 * Are    all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of     information?There are lots of citations and links to     other wiki pages, but this is heavy on newspapers and we can find some     more “expert” information on some of these issues/topics that would make     it more reliable
 * Are    the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on     the topic? Some of the good books are here, but     others are missing that could be added. More scholarly articles on     historical issues and general topics would strengthen this.
 * Are    the sources current? There are some cases or legal     actions/challengs that were “in process” that may have been resolved and     should be reviewed for currency.
 * Check    a few links. Do they work? Most seem to, but we’ll     need to check them all (perhaps assign these by section to us)
 * Might want to review the generic “voter suppression” site for    the US section to see that each of the issues mentioned in that article     are mentioned in ours. Jim Crow, Voting Rights Act, EMV, Presidential     Advisory Committee on Election Integrity, Voter ID, etc

Wang, Tova. The Politics of Voter Suppression : Defending and Expanding Americans' Right to Vote, Cornell University Press, 2012. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csustan/detail.action?docID=3138356.

Sources and references evaluation

Organization

Guiding questions


 * Is    the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It’s okay, but imbalanced and a bit hard to read because     of this imbalance
 * Does    the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Some, but it’s not terrible
 * Is    the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect     the major points of the topic? We might want to     have more/different sections for “historical” and contemporary issues. We     need a section on “impacts.”

Organization evaluation

Images and Media

Guiding questions


 * Does    the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images, and some should be available to add     in.
 * Are    images well-captioned?
 * Do    all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are    the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind    the scenes about how to represent this topic? Conversations about balance and neutrality (what counts     as suppression, if someone can’t legally vote are they suppressed, etc),     false claims of suppression/disenfranchisement, relationship of his page     to “political repression in the US,” suppression of Native     Americans/Indigenous Americans is mentioned tied to residential addresses
 * How    is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How    does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've     talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation

Overall impressions

Guiding questions


 * What    is the article's overall status? Offers     information on many key forms of suppression and offers examples to     highlight these but is imbalanced and poorly structured
 * What    are the article's strengths? Some good broad     coverage, many important cases addressed.
 * How    can the article be improved? More clarity to the     definition of suppression, and how this differs from actions to streamline/improve     elections. More expert sources rather than pop culture reporting. More     historical information including Democratic efforts as suppression     (helping with sense of balance). Updates to cases/situations in process.     More on impacts of suppression and efforts to challenge it.
 * How    would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article     well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It’s a C in my mind.