Talk:Election law

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

Politics High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article 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.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Quote?

Is there an attribution for the quote "the politics of law and the law of politics" from this article? - dcljr 03:46, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) Rick Hasen. See: https://www.worldcat.org/title/election-law-blog-the-law-of-politics-and-the-politics-of-law-election-law-campaign-finance-legislation-voting-rights-initiatives-redistricting-remedies-and-the-supreme-court-rick-hasens-blog/oclc/1156240641 --Topjur01 (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have redone this here, citing a better supporting source, The previously-cited may or may not be a reliable souece, but it is very specific to Elections in the United States and, if cited, would fit better in that article. The source appears to take a WP:POV viewpoint; citing it may raise issues involving WP:DUE. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More detailed treatments

I would like a more detailed treatment of US law, like one man one vote, gerrymandering, poll tax... felony disenfranchisemnt.

We should have one election law page per country of interest if we also want Canada. John wesley 17:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about you start writing them, we can comment, edit, etc. -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall 00:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To some extent we already have them for other countries (I just added Court of Disputed Returns and Category:Election law in the United Kingdom to See Also). But it is kind of haphazard what we do and do not cover (and there are probably other existing articles I didn't find). Kingdon 19:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia editing and history

SF> This page was last modified on 27 June 2007, at 19:35.

SF> It is an article that probably needs additional material. You could write pages on this. This is the article:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_law Election Law

Yes, pages have been written in Wikipedia on this topic, as you can see by clicking the links to Election and Suffrage and other articles. No, I see no great need ot expand this one.

SF> Maybe the article should lots of links to other places and cross references.

Yes. Links to other articles seem sparse here, and perhaps some of them lead to places that are less than the most appropriate in the context.

SF> Amazingly, the author seems to have left out a very important > part of Election Law: Who is qualified to be on the ballot and > how they can be knocked off.

As you saw in the History page, close to a dozen people contributed to two dozen revisions of this article in the past four years. Anyway, it seems to me such questions better belong to the Ballot article.

SF> theer is the issue of cross-endoresments - acandidate being named > by more than one party. This I think may be legal only on New York > State and it makes a big difference.

This topic is addressed at length (and correctly spelt) in another article called Electoral fusion. Looking at the present article, I see little need to expand its text. If anything, excess text in the "Issues" bullet points should be pared and replaced by links to articles that properly explain each particular issue.

SF> I think i need to register to say anything. If I do I wonder if > anyione would read it. maybe I should just edit it - When i edit I > undersdtand there is a way to gove a reason.

You can say anything anonymously, without signing in. I assume when an anonymous and unsummarized change appears in one of my thousands of watchlisted articles, it's by an idiot who doesn't care, and must be investigated immediately so it can be undone unless it proves to be a good change. I assume when a change is summarized and comes from a named user, it has been carefully done, and must be investigated eventually so it can be undone or improved if it proves to be a bad change. I assume many other watchers assume similarly.

Yes, you should sign in, and sign your name to your entry in a talk page using the four tilde method as described in the edit window. I am going to do something unusual; copy this E-mail into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Election_law, the talk page for the article in quesiton, and hope for leniency from my fellow experienced editors.

>SF> Does that mean that could be saved to disk or printed?

>JH> I assume so. I never wanted to do either.

SF> It would give me time to read t - plus a better way to search through it.

If you like. With this particular entry I am combining the advantage of Juno offline mail and those of Wikipedia online page editing, but normally I do mail offline and Wiki online. After you reply in the article's talk page, we can move this inappropriately long discussion off of there and onto your personal talk page. Here are the four tildes for my Wiki signature: Jim.henderson (talk) 17:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lowenstein and Hasen

The bit about Lowenstein and Hasen comes off to me as an advertisement.2601:141:0:7857:74C1:3499:8B59:DC26 (talk) 16:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]