Talk:Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:47, 14 November 2015

Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 19, 2013. (Reviewed version).

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law GA‑class Top‑importance

	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 articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States GA‑class High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

U.S. Congress GA‑class High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) Thing(s).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Constitution GA‑class Top‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Constitution, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Constitution of the United States 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 ConstitutionWikipedia:WikiProject United States ConstitutionTemplate:WikiProject United States ConstitutionUnited States Constitution articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) thing(s).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights GA‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Archives (inactive)

This article is within the scope of National Archives project, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.National ArchivesWikipedia:WikiProject National ArchivesTemplate:WikiProject National ArchivesNational Archives articles

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

African diaspora GA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 18, 2004, December 18, 2005, December 18, 2006, December 18, 2007, December 6, 2008, December 6, 2009, December 6, 2010, December 6, 2012, and December 6, 2014.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 3 months

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

The following phrase is incorrect

"two Democrats, Reverdy Johnson of Maryland and James Nesmith of Oregon voted "aye." "

Johnson voted aye but was NOT a Democrat, he was a Unionist.

Should be corrected to:

"two Demcrats, Benjamin F. Harding and James W. Nesmith, both of Oregon, voted "aye."

Do you have a reliable source for what you say? SMP0328. (talk) 17:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Robertson v. Baldwin citation needs clarification

The plain use of the words "sailor" and "deserters" make it seem as though Robertson, et al, had run away from the Navy, and that the case was about the obligations of those in the military. They had not and it was not. They were merchant seamen who fled from the merchant ship Arago in Astoria. They were arrested and held in jail until the ship was ready to sail, then forcibly put into the captain's custody. After they refused to work during the voyage, they were rearrested in San Francisco and charged under a federal statute criminalizing a seaman's refusal to work. I can't edit the article, but I would recommend wording it as:

In Robertson v. Baldwin (1897), a group of merchant seaman challenged federal statutes which criminalized a seaman's failure to complete their contractual term of service. The Court ruled that seamen's contracts had been considered unique from time immemorial, and that "the amendment was not intended to introduce any novel doctrine with respect to certain descriptions of service which have always been treated as exceptional." 81.85.69.212 (talk) 19:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here's the text of the opinion to confirm all that shizz: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/165/275/case.html 81.85.69.212 (talk) 19:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 19:40, 14 November 2015 edit 81.85.69.212 (talk) →The Robertson v. Baldwin citation needs clarification: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:47, 14 November 2015 edit undo 81.85.69.212 (talk) Added a link to the opinion text of Robertson v. Baldwin Next edit →
Line 36:		Line 36:

	In Robertson v. Baldwin (1897), a group of merchant seaman challenged federal statutes which criminalized a seaman's failure to complete their contractual term of service. The Court ruled that seamen's contracts had been considered unique from time immemorial, and that "the amendment was not intended to introduce any novel doctrine with respect to certain descriptions of service which have always been treated as exceptional." [[Special:Contributions/81.85.69.212\|81.85.69.212]] ([[User talk:81.85.69.212\|talk]]) 19:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)		In Robertson v. Baldwin (1897), a group of merchant seaman challenged federal statutes which criminalized a seaman's failure to complete their contractual term of service. The Court ruled that seamen's contracts had been considered unique from time immemorial, and that "the amendment was not intended to introduce any novel doctrine with respect to certain descriptions of service which have always been treated as exceptional." [[Special:Contributions/81.85.69.212\|81.85.69.212]] ([[User talk:81.85.69.212\|talk]]) 19:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

			Oh, here's the text of the opinion to confirm all that shizz: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/165/275/case.html [[Special:Contributions/81.85.69.212\|81.85.69.212]] ([[User talk:81.85.69.212\|talk]]) 19:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)