This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

	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.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 19, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column 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, December 6, 2014, December 6, 2015, December 6, 2016, and December 6, 2018.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Law Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. United States High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Constitution Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is about one (or many) thing(s). Human rights 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 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 African diaspora 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

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

"...Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas, to proclaim the war had ended and so had slavery (in the Confederate states)" Parens unnecessary; war not ended; Gen Order#3 freed slaves in Texas only :WP is junk. Sadsaque ( talk) 21:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Based on https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/38-1/s134#details there were 3 Democratic Senators that voted in favor of the 13th amendment to the constitution, yet the 13th amendment's article (this one) and Senator James Nesmith's article claim that only 2 Democratic Senators, James Nesmith and Reverdy Johnson, voted in favor of the 13th amendment's passage.

The missing Senator in question is Benjamin F Harding. His page, alongside Reverdy Johnson's, has no mention of their votes in favor of the amendment.

I was planning on correcting both claims in the two articles alongside adding the claim to the pages of the 2 other Senators. The claim on this page is not sourced, but the page is semi-protected and I didn't want to step on any toes editing something there. So I figured I'd change it on the 3 men's pages, and whenever I became more comfortable with wikipedia, I'd try adding it to the protected article.

However, on James Nesmith's article the claim is sourced twice in two different books. I have been able to read the first source online, and the claim is dubious at best. The page they cite has no mention of either James Nesmith's vote or Reverdy Johnson's vote. It mentions Reverdy Johnson's support of an amendment like the 13th and the previous pages spoke of other prominent Democrats that supported such an amendment, yet no mention of the actual voting. Reading past the page they cite will require I get access to the book. I plan on doing so if I can find it at my local library.

I have not been able to view the page of the second source, if my local library has it I'll try and read it. Though if it's as dubious as the first citation I doubt it has the facts to back up the article's claim.

I was planning on adding my note to Reverdy Johnson's and Benjamin F. Harding's pages and leaving this page and the 13th amendment alone, but thought it'd be strange to have these claims hyperlinked to James Nesmith's and the 13th Amendment's pages with contradictory statements. After seeking help, I was recommended to start a talk discussion on the pages I'm trying to contradict to try and reach a consensus before adding information on 2 articles that would contradict 2 other articles. This is one of the pages, the other being James Nesmith's talk discussion. Jinandwin ( talk) 13:32, 25 November 2022 (UTC) reply

If it is incorrect, this article should be updated with correction (it is certainly possible that whoever wrote what is there now misconstrued or mistook something). The website you link to suggests its source is this website: https://voteview.com/ Probably best if you find it on that source website, and if you can confirm with books or published encyclopedia, even better. In short, if you could do a bit more research to pin it down, I think everyone will want to go along with your edits. -- Alanscottwalker ( talk) 18:40, 25 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your response, somehow I completely missed that govtrack had a source. I found the vote voteview here: https://voteview.com/rollcall/RS0380134 and frustratingly, it is sourced from "Congresional (sic) Globe vol. 65, p. 1490; Senate Journal vol. 56, p. 313".

What's even more confounding is that Reverdy Johnson is listed as a Unionist on voteview. More Senators are counted as Unionists or Unconditional unionists on voteview's vote count. Based on what I've read, Reverdy Johnson probably was a Unionist at the time of the vote.

Would it be wrong of me to use the Congressional Globe and Senate Journal as my sources without reading it myself to make the claim that Harding and Nesmith were the only Democratic Senators to vote for the 13th? Jinandwin ( talk) 20:05, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply

You can use the website, imo, it is published by a department of UCLA, edited and maintained by academics. Also, its taking and presentation of the data from the congressional record, likely makes it a WP:Secondary source, which are preferred. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 20:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC) reply