Talk:Sedition Act 1661

Law Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 However, it is no longer in force today.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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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