Talk:2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court election

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Elections and Referendums

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

United States courts and judges

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges 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.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Candidate ideologies

@BottleOfChocolateMilk I feel like there could be a better way to show or describe the ideological sway of each of the potential candidates, since their leanings are evident in more than just media labels. Talthiel (talk) 20:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Talthiel: Like what? I don't think we need to have an entire section describing their ideology in detail. In both this supreme court race and the previous one, media outlets have acknowledged reality and started describing candidates as "liberal" and "conservative," as well as saying the court has a liberal or conservative majority. It's simple, concise, and backed up by reliable sources. What's the problem? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think we should just describe them as liberal or conservative. But I feel like its unnecessary for the footnote "described by the media as X" when some of them have said they are X, and their decisions and pasts point towards being X.
For example Colon and Taylor were former Democratic assembly-people. While Lazar was hired as an assistant attorney general to Schimel and defended Act 10, (the anti-union legislation), and Act 43 (the gerrymander), and additionally she is a contributor to the Federalist Society. While Grogan was a supporter of Kelly in 2023, and worked to undermine his conservative opponent. Which makes me feel like putting "described by the media as X" makes it up for debate, or makes it less clear, plus we don't usually label the ideological sway of candidates until after they file, but I could be wrong. I also didn't intend to sound like I denied the partisan reality of these elections, I more just feel the footnotes are unnecessary. Talthiel (talk) 22:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Talthiel: I think you're greatly overestimating the amount of knowledge that readers of this page will have about the candidates. Most people won't know anything about these people and won't put in the effort to research them, so it's very useful to have a convenient note clarifying which ideological side they fall on. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 02:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

then don't mince words, I feel like using "described by the media" obfuscates the facts of what these people believe in. Talthiel (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Statewide election

@BottleOfChocolateMilk: You asked "why" on your edit comment. I've been looking at other election articles and thought it would be a best practice for the intro to thoroughly define the election scope up front. Wisconsin's Supreme Court elections are all state-wide, but that's not the case everywhere, and some in Wisconsin want to change that. I think for a person visiting this article without context, that is the kind of basic information that they should find in the first sentence. And I actually think I'd like to go to "non-partisan state-wide election" because many states' high court elections are actually partisan. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which states don't elect supreme court justices in statewide elections? That is almost unanimously the norm. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:28, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Louisiana Supreme Court for one. That was the one I was familiar with. There are probably others. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 10:04, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there's only 1 state that doesn't do statewide SC races, I don't see why we need to specify. People will assume it's statewide unless told otherwise. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 15:26, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Kentucky also elects their Supreme Court on a district-by-district basis as well. Talthiel (talk) 18:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And after looking, Mississippi Supreme Court also elects from judicial districts. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there's only 3 states out of 50 that don't do statewide SC races, I don't see why we need to specify. People will assume it's statewide unless told otherwise. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well, I'll obviously abide by whatever the consensus says. But I do think this issue will grow in relevance in state supreme court elections. Republicans will likely try to institute more Supreme Court district systems to gerrymander state courts, particularly in states where they have legislative majorities but the state high court has given them problems—like Wisconsin and North Carolina. Like if Crawford wins this Supreme Court election, I fully expect there will at least be a constitutional amendment introduced in the legislature in this term. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 09:57, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think it'd be better to address that issue if/when it happens, not anticipate in advance when it hasn't happened yet. Talthiel (talk) 20:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was just giving the full context for why people visiting an article like this could be unsure of the electorate. But I guess the current version is fine for now--I liked it well enough when I originally wrote it. Just felt it could use a little more on basic details for readers who don't follow every judicial election. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 16:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]