Talk:Sedition Act 1661

Assessment

I have assessed the article to be mid-importance. This is because the article is about a topic that was historically significant. It is also the predecessor for Treason Act 1695 and Treason Felony Act 1848. However, it is no longer in force today. Unless some other importance is demonstrated through reliable sources, I'm hesitant to assess it as high importance.Bless sins 21:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding quality, this certainly isn't stub class. It was hard to decide whether it was start class or B-class. I compared it to a few B-class articles such as (Section Sixteen One of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) and found that this article was on par with them. However, there are article in B-class more comprehensive then this one.Bless sins 21:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, at first glance a B-class status may seem too generous, due to lack of comprehensiveness. But readers should realize that there may not be a lot of encyclopedic material on the topic, and this article probably does contain the majority of material we are likely to find.Bless sins 21:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Short title - page move needed?

The short title given to this Act (13 Car.2 St.1 c.1) by the Statute Law Revision Act 1948 is The Sedition Act 1661. I think that the title of this article may be wrong. James500 (talk) 16:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

There's no better evidence than that. I will move it. Richard75 (talk) 17:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)