Talk:Prorogation

Article vs dab[edit]

User:Sceptre. The fact that it is currently a bad stub shouldn't discourage someone from expanding a WP:SUMMARYSTYLE per WP:DABCONCEPT ..if the primary meaning of a term proposed for disambiguation is a broad concept or type of thing that is capable of being described in an article, and a substantial portion of the links asserted to be ambiguous are instances or examples of that concept or type, then the page located at that title should be an article describing it, and not a disambiguation page. . This was previously a bad dab for several reasons, so I've taken the bold step of keeping the direction going forward, rather than going back to a dab with a dict def at the top which would be removed as a dab and entries that fail WP:PTM. Readers are clearly served better with a definition and I believe a better article can be written, irrespective of the challenge, or my inability to complete the rewrite. Widefox; talk 00:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re "rv; see WP:MOSBODY, which discourages very short sections because they make the article harder to read. As each section is about a dozen words long, they make much more semantic sense in a list. I also doubt this article could make a jump from dab page to article because it's just too broad; see, for example" - a dab is not a list - see WP:MOSDAB for why a dab is the least helpful type for readers. Widefox; talk 14:45, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Ending"? No. But...[edit]

I have tentatively substituted "interrupting" for the quite incorrect "ending" but of course this is also not exact. It is clear that to the Romans, though not for current Parliamentary practice perhaps, prorogation could include the increase or extension of a term of office or appointment.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 19:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]