But I want to recommend the wonderful paper "the null ritual" [1] by Gerd Gigerenzer et al. It shows that a precise understanding of what a p-value means is extremely rare even among statistics lecturers, and, more interestingly, that there have always been fundamentally different understandings even when p-values were invented, e.g. between Fisher and Pearson.
Beyond that, there was a special issue recently in the american statistician discussing at length the issues of p-values in general and .05 in particular [2].
Personally, I of course feel that null hypothesis testing is often stupid and harmful, because null effects never exist in reality, effects without magnitude are useless, and because the "statelessness" of NHST creates or exacerbates problems such as publication bias and lack of power.
[1] http://library.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/ft/gg/GG_Null_2004.pdf