Talk:Unenrolled voter

Nota Bene: This article has been extensively rewritten since its recreation at this location, so this is essentially another article. --HappyCamper 17:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm the editor helping you out on the page unenrolled voter. It seems like your first taste of Wikipedia hasn't been as smooth sailing as it should be - I'll do my best to rectify that. First things first: If you need to contact me, just click on my name, and leave a message on my talk page. There's a little plus sign that looks like this (+) at the top of every talk page which you can click. When you do this, it automatically adds a message to the bottom of the page. At the same time, a nice orange bar will light up on my screen when I log on. That tells me there's a new message waiting for me. This is how Wikipedians communicate with one another.

In the article, you said you wanted to add a source for the article. It's best to do it through an external link at the moment. Take a look at the examples below for some ideas - I'm including a link to Wikipedia here in different ways.

http://en.wikipedia.org [1] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I'm also an administrator here, so please, feel free to ask me any questions you might have about this site. I can see from your edit history that some other users might not have had the time to be so detailed with their explanations. It's probably because this site is extremely popular, and there are lots of other maintenance tasks that need attending to. I hope you understand that they weren't trying to be intentionally abrupt - Wikipedians are generally nice people :-) Anyway, I hope this helps you getting started on the right track to becoming a good editor.

By the way, you can also put the unenrolled voter page on your watchlist. Just click on the word "watch" at the top of your screen. Then, whenever you click on "watchlist", the article will show up at the top if there are any new edits to it, or its talk page. In this way, you don't have to visit the article all the time to see what's new. I hope this helps, and I'll see you around! --HappyCamper 17:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I was indeed frustrated. I will work hard to understand how things work and make approprite editings. Thanks again —This unsigned comment was added by Merlinus (talk • contribs) . No problem :-) I'll try my best to make you feel at home. I can't prevent the article from being considered for deletion, but what I can do is edit it so that hopefully the community feels that it is worthy of inclusion. It's sort of a wholistic method of determining encyclopedic value, but this strategy has worked for the large part since 2001, and will very likely not change anytime soon. Unfortunately, sometimes, the system can be a bit blind to newcomers. Oh, please sign your comments by adding two hyphens and four tildes at the end of your posts, like this: --merlinus 11:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC). It makes it easier to keep track of your posts that you make to Wikipedia. You can do this easily by clicking on the little "scribble" at the top of the edit window - it's the 3rd button from the right. I have to leave the computer for now, but will come back to check up on things. Feel free to edit other articles too, and take your time with the editing. It should be enjoyable and relaxing for you too. Have a good day! --HappyCamper 17:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC) thanks very much to the editor (happy camper) I was very frustrated by some very rude things and much worse. One editor wrote a note that I was a juvinal racist white voter. How wrong could they possibly be on that one... I'm an old semi reformed liberal from the seventies whose trying to become computer literate. I am Unenrolled as I said but I would give my life to defend our countries freedom our liberties and our civil liberties. I defend anyones political oppenents right to speak out to their hearts content. I welcome people to immigrate here as my family did as long as they do it legally. I think people from around the world aught to have equal opportunity to immigrate here with no favorites. We need to be in control to vigilantly screen out all prospective dangers to our national security before they enter our county. If this can best be done by giving more work visa's or whatever-fine. I am an average american from Massachusetts with moderate beliefs. I enjoy an unenrolled status because I do not fully agree with either Democrats or Republicans, but think they both have good and bad points. --merlinus 18:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

We're all just volunteers here - me included. Sometimes, people can be unbelieveably rude and insensitive. It's simply inexcusable. We do have pages like Wikipedia:Assume good faith and Wikipedia:Wikilove, but sometimes people forget - maybe because we're all human? I've had my share of nastiness here too, and it can really eat at a person. The thing is to not let it get to you, and my rule of thumb is to simply walk away and do something else when that happens. There are over 1 million pages on Wikipedia, and many more to be created - you're bound to find that little niche here where you feel comfortable contributing. You don't need to feel obligated to reply to everything that is directed towards you, especially if it is something that amounts to a personal attack.--merlinus 20:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus--merlinus 20:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Keep in mind that by editing here, you're exposing yourself to a fully international project - you will meet people from all over the world. Predominantly from North America, Europe, and Austrailia, but you'll come across other people as well. There is a bit of online "culture shock", but after a while it will feel better. Wikipedia is a really interesting project, and you'll learn a lot just by editing here. If the editing environment does become vicious, let me know - I will do my part to make sure that it stops. Anyway, I know you have an interest in explaining what it means to be Unenrolled. When you edit to explain this, you have to be very careful that your particular political biases do not leak into the article. This simply means that you have to be prepared to compare and contrast. For example, for the article unenrolled voter, you need to explain why these groups of voters have their characteristic inclinations. What are past and current concerns of this group of voters? When did this movement become something important in the US? Think "big". Here's how it typically works: you add something, and someone else comes along and fixes it up. So, don't worry if it may not entirely conform to Wikipedia standards of layout, organization, or whatnot. You'll pick up these best practises in no time. Add little bits and pieces to different articles and observe how other editors fix up your additions. As a tip, try adding something about mundane things, like apple and see what happens. There's also a welcoming and interactive place here at the reference desk: Wikipedia:Reference desk - feel free to contribute questions and answers, and just observe how collaborative and co-operative editing works when it's healthy and robust. --HappyCamper 18:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Thank You, You have both soothed my nerves, had the patience to give me a better understanding of how it all works. The first drafts indeed should have been put in the sandbox, but I did not understand how it worked yet. So now I hope I can be a resposible user and sometimes editor. I will not sweat the small stuff if people insult me personally like Zoe did. I had forgotten that anyone could read those old first rough drafts that were nothing but trash to me! A lesson here huh? Anyway, most of the time I just enjoy reading other peoples articles... I really think one can honestly learn quite a lot here if he takes the time. When I found it I was pleased to no end because I am disabled and have trouble getting out sometimes. Thanks again. --merlinus 20:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure you'll be a fine editor. Lots of people here enjoy editing sparingly, doing only minor fixups - fixing spelling mistakes, recategorizing articles, and the like. We call those "WikiGnomes" - they are generally very well respected on Wikipedia. Yes, the old drafts are available - they're in the edit history. If you click on the "history" tab of every page, you can see all the editors that have contributed to the article, as well as the edit summaries that they have entered. If the article is deleted, then only administrators have access to them. They can be recovered on request. You are right to be cautious about what you submit to Wikipedia - every single edit becomes publically available on the internet. You might find Wikipedia:How to edit a page useful - there's a table of how to do "wiki syntax" down the middle. You can make your own personal sandbox by making a subpage within your username - you can do this by clicking on this red link User:Merlinus/Sandbox. Be careful what you put in the sandbox though, because all the edits are available in the edit history! Generally, people write articles in their sandboxes, and them move them into the main article namespace when they are done. Also, check out the links on the left side of the screen. There's a "special pages" button which might be of interest to you. There's also a "recent changes" tab - you can see all the edits that are being made in real time. It can be quite addictive though, so be careful! --HappyCamper 23:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC) [edit] More helpful links WikiGnome, which redirects to Wikipedia:WikiGnome. --HappyCamper 11:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC

I've massively rewritten this article, but I'm very skeptical that any of this is sourced and factual. If it does not substantially improve over the next few days, I think I'm going to propose an AfD. --HappyCamper 16:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You did a much better job writing it than I ever did. If there are any ways I could help "SOURCE" THIS INFORMATION FROM our Massachusetts and Federal voting web sites should I list them here? —This unsigned comment was added by Merlinus (talk • contribs) .

Perhaps a link to the article? Also, something which shows that it is terminology which is already widely in use. Perhaps a picture of a form that someone needs to sign in order to be on this unenrolled list. We need the history of this terminology, and why it has become an important concept in recent years. Why it is significant in the social context of American politics. I know very little about these things, but with a little bit of reasearch, it should substantially improve the article. My main concern is that this article is being written to propagate a concept which is not widely in use, and that is something which Wikipedia aims to avoid. Well, if you're able to find some more interesting stuff for the article, please feel free to add it. It takes a while (maybe even a few weeks) for an article to get reasonably established - I'll try to help you out if I can, so please take your time to get the article up to shape. --HappyCamper 16:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Organizations in each state

I've removed the list of contacts and phone numbers in this edit [1] - instead I've indicated in the article that there are these chapters, such as one on Massachusetts. Typically, articles on Wikipedia do not provide this sort of information - instead, we relegate this to an implicit reference, where we give enough contextual information for another user to find the information they need. --HappyCamper 17:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Boston article

This is a boston Blobe Article I copied, but I was worried about how to incorperate its information without breaking any copyright laws. How do I use it as a souse but not break copyrights? —This unsigned comment was added by Merlinus (talk • contribs) .

I've removed the article in this edit: [2]

I don't have the time at the moment to investigate its proper use on Wikipedia - but here's a good rule of thumb: If you find text on the internet, assume it is copyrighted. That essentially means that it cannot be used on Wikipedia. That's why we insist every single edit to Wikipedia is original and compatible with the GFDL - this ensures that we can distribute the content here without having to worry about these legalities.

Now, about how to source the article: Did you find that article from a certain website? If you did, then you can just add a weblink to it at the bottom of the article. Just do that, and I'll help wikify it for you. Or, you can simply put some square brackets about the link. I'll show you how to do this on your talk page. --HappyCamper 17:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

More comments

I found this from a deleted page:

i have rewritten my Unenrolled article several times with respect to corrections from editors from Winipedia without soapboxing this done to better replect the philosophy of why people sign up as unenrolled status instead of Democrats, Republicans or other Parties. I give full respect to Republicans and Democrats, for those are the ones I inevidably vote for.

No, Not Independents. Inependents are not Unenrolled. Independents in my state and most others are a lesser political party like Libritarian or the Green Party. Unenrolled is the Goverment Status you claim when you do not wish to belong to party.

I called myself an Independent until the Goverment said that we had to call ourselves "Unenrolled" several years ago as the word Independent was taken by a new Political Party.

I very much appreciate your guidance and help through this frustrating time where I was learning to use Winipedia. I would make a suggestion though that some of the editors be less volatile and more tolerant about the first experimentations of people who are using Winipedia. If they were not so belligerent people might just get bored and go away and come back to use it merely for reference. I was ethnocentric to the point of not sensitive enough towards what illegal immigrants or those close to them in my earliest draft. I quickly tried to remedy that but it kept coming back to haunt me and I'm not even against legal immigration for whoever wants it. I was so frustrated to tears that my rough draft that was written after watching the news was causing grief to some people. --merlinus 12:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus--merlinus 12:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Is there a "Winipedia" Forum where other Unenrolled voters and other "swing voter" can debate issues that applly to Unenrolled Voters.

Now, I can't figure out from this whether "unenrolled" is an actual status of a voter, or whether it is something else. Could you add a few edits into the article to clarify this? Also, to address the last question - Wikipedia isn't intended to be a forum for any organization at all - so you will not find pages on Wikipedia where people will be discussing these political philosophies. If you do, it would generally be a big "no-no". Instead, Wikipedia's talk pages are meant for discussion of article content - that means, we're not here to judge so much the facts, but rather, discuss how to present them neutrally, fairly, and without bias. I hope this clears things up. --HappyCamper 17:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I have made a minor edit as you suggested: --merlinus 20:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Merlinus--merlinus 20:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The concept of an 'unenrolled voter' does seem to be a genuine one (witness explanation of the situation in Mass. here -- http://www.ma.lwv.org/ElectionPubs/voting_in_ma.htm). As a non-US resident it is a concept that I am unfamiliar with and think that a Wikipedia article could provide a useful explanation. The existing stub needs quite a bit of work to make it such, but I don't see that the article is entirely without merit. Mazzy 12:29, 13 April 2006 (UTC)