Talk:Women's suffrage

Latest comment: 3 days ago by Aemilius Adolphin in topic Female suffrage in South Australia

Regarding the Timeline

edit

I have a few questions regarding the Timeline section:

  1. Does this article actually need a Timeline section when there is already a History section?
  2. Why is the Timeline organised by country, instead of chronological order?
  3. Why would a "timeline" organised by country be necessary when there is a breakdown by continent immediately after it?

--MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Race in America, sec 2

edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2024 and 24 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lovebug416 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Everlark13 (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Map

edit

It's surprising that the map color for the US does not reflect the date of the 19th amendment. Perhaps that is beacuse significant barriers to voting existed until at least the voting rights act of 1965. These barriers, however, did not single out women. If this broad interpretation holds, it's only a small step further to say that full suffrage is not yet realized because women can't vote from prison.

It seems to me that regardless of such quibbles the US should be colored 1920. Mdmi (talk) 15:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Agree with this comment. The color is misleading here 172.58.30.212 (talk) 13:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Female suffrage in South Australia

edit

Hello all

I have changed the date on which women won the vote and the right to stand for parliament in South Australia to 1895. I have added two reliable sources. The confusion is that the South Australian colonial parliament passed a Bill granting these rights in December 1894. However, the bill did not gain royal assent until February 1895 and this is the date it became law. The two cited sources explain this. I will progressively change the date throughout the article to 1895.

Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

You should not do that: instead, you should leave both dates in the article, and explain why their are two dates. That is how it is normally done. --Aciram (talk) 12:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
That's not right, we normally put in the date which the consensus of recent reliable sources states is the date on which women gained the legal right to vote (and in this case, also the right to stand for parliament). For women in the colony of South Australia that is February 1895. Put it this way: if the South Australian government had held a snap election in January 1895 would women have had the right to vote in that election? Answer: No. If the South Australian government had held a snap election in March 1895, would women have had the right to vote in that election? Answer: Yes. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply