Template talk:Voting rights in the United States

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Law This template is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. United States: Government This template is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts This template is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

Reverted edits

@Prototime: I don't understand why the edits I made are questionable. Could you explain why you think they should be excluded? Thank you. Mitchumch (talk) 19:55, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mitchumch, the edits are appreciated but the content doesn't reasonably fit it with this template. The list of Supreme Court cases is great information, but it bloats the template so much that it almost warrants its own template (and there are many more Supreme Court voting rights cases not included in your list). Moreover, the list of Supreme Court cases doesn't add much direct value to this template because the cases are simply party names without any additional information; just from looking at a case name, a reader cannot discern whether Shelby County v. Holder is an Equal Protection Clause case, a 15th Amendment case, a VRA case, an NVRA case, or anything else. In contrast, the template's links to the pages about the Equal Protection Clause, VRA, etc. allow readers to access a page about the codified law itself and read information about any Supreme Court cases that have interpreted it. The organizational additions to the template raise similar concerns; for instance, beyond the Leadership Conference and NAACP, there are a huge swath of organizations that work on voting rights issues, including many law firms that have voting rights practices and nonprofits that work on it occasionally, and there's no real limiting principle on what orgs should be included. For example, Leadership Conference and NAACP may stand out as "pro" voting expansion orgs, but then there are also groups like True the Vote and Judicial Watch that are "anti" voting expansion orgs that would in fairness need to be included. This would be a very, very long list. And these groups, while working on voting rights, are only tangentially related to voting rights concepts themselves. In short, these lists make this template unwieldy for not much reader benefit. But I would support creating additional templates or list pages that include the information you've added here (such as a "List of voting rights cases in the United States" page, perhaps with the cases organized by the provision interpreted and with short case summaries). –Prototime (talk · contribs) 20:20, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Prototime: Thank you for responding. Roughly speaking, how many USSC cases for voting rights exists? Also, roughly speaking, how many organizations exists that would satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) criteria? What are the objections for the "Government organizations" section? Mitchumch (talk) 20:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]