Jump to content

Talk:Alien and Sedition Acts: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 35: Line 35:


[[Special:Contributions/71.126.235.108|71.126.235.108]] ([[User talk:71.126.235.108|talk]]) 03:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC) Michael Kerpan
[[Special:Contributions/71.126.235.108|71.126.235.108]] ([[User talk:71.126.235.108|talk]]) 03:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC) Michael Kerpan

== Links in the Introduction ==

There is no link to some of Wikipedia's other pages in the introduction, specifically the Naturalization Act of 1798 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1798). Also there aren't even pages for the other three acts.

Revision as of 03:00, 5 November 2013

Used against Federalists?

Whom in particular? That is just one source that is mentioned for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.57.80 (talk) 22:47, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a place to promote a 21st century advocate of nullification

I removed a section talking about a 21st century advocate of nullification. It is appropriate to discuss Jefferson's attempts at nullification and possibly secession as a response to Alien and Sedition Acts. Garfield's comments more than 60 years later are about Jefferson and nullification. The deleted remarks refer to a modern political outlier advocating nullification today based on an unusual interpretation of the 10th Amendment, and are not primarily historical commentary about Jefferson's response to the Alien and Sedition Acts. Waltezell (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article completely omits any kind of definitional statement

This is the worst Wiki article that I have ever seen notwithstanding the fact that it offers a lot of competently presented information related to the subject. What it does not do is make any kind of clear statement as to what the acts actually were, what they forbid or what they say. It is as though the critical first paragraph is missing. We launch immediately into why they were enacted, the context, some effects, etc. All very fine. But what were they? 98.69.160.197 (talk) 19:39, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is still very true. Is anyone working on this?Mysticete (talk) 07:01, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, agreed. Holy cow, this article is terrible, never identifying what the acts actually were. Can anyone help? 98.244.55.218 (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Twenty-five people were hanged"

This sentence precedes a list of names of people who were fined and/or imprisoned. There is no citation for this claim and it would seem to be a typo -- perhaps it was supposed to say "28 people were convicted."

71.126.235.108 (talk) 03:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC) Michael Kerpan[reply]

Links in the Introduction

There is no link to some of Wikipedia's other pages in the introduction, specifically the Naturalization Act of 1798 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1798). Also there aren't even pages for the other three acts.