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

Law 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. United States 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. History This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I reverted all the changes from the last two days. In addition to some random vandalism, an anonymous user inserted the entire text of the declaration of rights, without quotes or introduction. We could include the text, but I think the summary is adequate, and External links has a pointer to the full text. If we want the text we will need a section and an introductory sentence. Lou I 13:01, 21 July 2005 (UTC) reply

By the way there is more about the Stamp Act Congress and i'd appreciate it if what i added (to which is accurate) wasn't deleted! If you didn't know i actually am studying the vigorously studying the American Revolution and what i put is not vandalism. I find it hard to believe that the page on the Stamp Act Congress is not even referenced. I guess i shouldn't waste my time improving articles! If you want to improve the article i suggest finding the relevant infomation yourself. Even though i didn't reference it i'm very busy and don't always have the time and yes i was going to reference it but it doesn't matter now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joehistorynut ( talk • contribs) (04:06, 9 November 2007)

Discussion of proposed mergeinto is on the Stamp Act discussion page. BradMajors ( talk) 18:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC) reply

It is astonishing that Lou and Joe are parties to this terribly-written article. They both write as though they were texting each other. The main article is at this level too; it should be deleted and the subject started anew by someone with some knowledge of American history...Joe, i think not u. Dangnad ( talk) 19:59, 20 October 2009 (UTC) reply

The last section requires a citation. The reference to "Dartmouth" I assume means William Legge, Lord Dartmouth. in 1765 he was President of the Board of Trade, not Secretary of State for the Colonies, this didn't happen until 1772. In 1765 the American colonies were still under the Secretary of State for the Southern Department. I have not found a good historical reference as to where the declaration went, however it would most likely have gone to two places, the Board of Trade, but more importantly the Secretary of State for the Southern Department. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starfurys483 ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The Stamp Act Congress was not a legislature(neither was the Continental Congress), and it had no legal or constitutional jurisdiction. In English usage before 1789, a "congress" is a diplomatic body. But how to fix this in the infobox I don't know. Mikedelsol ( talk) 19:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC) reply