Talk:Statute Law Revision Act 1888

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Excessive detail

An encyclopaedia article should summarise what the act is about, not set out the entire text of the act in full, which is more or less what the current version of this article is doing. If people want to read about every amendment to the law that this act made, they can go and look at the act. It isn't necessary to put it all here, and this is not what Wikipedia is for.

It also isn't necessary to add a link to the act to every article about another act that was amended by it, when the only amendment made was to remove the words of enactment (i.e. "be it enacted by the authority aforesaid", which used to appear at the start of every section after section 1). That doesn't improve the reader's understanding of the act and is entirely superfluous. Richard75 (talk) 12:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I'm just filling in what was present in other, more recent Statute Law Revision acts. These acts are a very valuable and important part of British legal history and related Victorian efforts to reform British law.

I have also completed the list of short titles, which is important as the citations, providing extra information not present in the original material This provides extra encyclopedic value.

On the value noting down the changes in the act, I respectfully disagree. The provisions in this act were described as unique by the esteemed parliamentary clerk Courtenay Ilbert (see https://archive.org/details/legislativemetho00ilbeiala/page/70/mode/2up) and deserve to be noted down accordingly.

Further, the removal of "be it enacted" is itself an interesting aspect of British legal history, especially in relation to the Interpretation Act 1889, which reformed statutory construction and further allowed simplification of the language of enactments.

I would ask that you do not revert these changes until further discussion can be had. Hughbe98 (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't deny that the act is important, and it's certainly worth including an explanation about the repeal of the enacting words. But a list of every single repeal seems like too much detail for what an encyclopaedia is seeking to achieve. That information is all in the act, if anyone wants to see it. And the short titles are, I'm sorry to say, original research. Richard75 (talk) 22:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]