Talk:Sherman Antitrust Act

Proposed Merger with "federal preemption" page
Unfortunately, the other page is hard to read and may be viewed as being of low quality. Some cleanup would be required, but that page should probably be a section of this page. 2602:306:311F:13B0:20E2:AAA5:A8EF:1D0 (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

'Support' Agree per nom. JLo-Watson (talk) 00:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Support, other page definitely looks like a needlessly separated section of this article. Biglulu (talk) 07:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 10:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 15 July 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. -- Vaulter 18:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 → Sherman Antitrust Act – The "of 1890" isn't necessary for disambiguation, and removing it would make the title more WP:CONCISE. The shorter version also appears to be substantially more common in reliable sources. This would revert an undiscussed 2018 move. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:26, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. Target redirects here. SWinxy (talk) 02:51, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Station1 (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Support move per nom. The "of 1890" is unnecessary.  O.N.R.  (talk) 00:23, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Clayton Antitrust Act
Hi, I just added a source for this small section. Specifically, I cited The Oxford Encyclopedia of American Business, Labor, and Economic History. I also added an in-line citation and a few quotation marks for phrases that appeared in the source I found and that would be harder or more confusing to re-phrase using my own words.--NoFace23 (talk) 07:58, 16 October 2023 (UTC)