Talk:Act of Sederunt

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Law Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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.

Act of Sederunt was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 18, 2009	Good article nominee	Not listed

Reversion of revision 30862431

I've reverted revision 30862431 for the following reasons.

Wording edits are to commented-out text that is not part of the article text.
Remaining edits are largely stylistic choice with no benefits either way, such as:

en dashes instead of em dashes
bolding the titles of Acts. For (sub)sections, this is generally only done where there is a redirect to that (sub)section or if it's in the lead. When used in a manner similar to italics (as here in some cases), this shouldn't be done for "legal or constitutional documents".

The rephrasing to "replacing its de facto power" is uncited. The 1532 Act did not grant the Court any power to make Acts of Sederunt. Until the 1540 Act, it was Parliament that held the power. If there existed a de facto power in addition to Parliament's power, there should be a citation.

LiamMcS (talk) 17:44, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]