Talk:Baron Cromwell

Lead gives different impression from rest of article
Reading the lead, I get a different impression from that given by the rest of the article. This may be due to my lack of understanding, but I feel others may have the same problems: PJTraill (talk) 10:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In the lead, we read “... in 1497 the peerage ... fell into abeyance, ... The title remained in abeyance for over 400 years”, but the 4th and 5th creations (1536/1540) appear to contradict this — perhaps this has to do with the technical meaning of abeyance, but if so it would be helpful to clarify this.
 * This paragraph of the lead also moves straight from the abeyance in 1497 to its termination in 1922, not returning to the 4th/5th creation till the second paragraph.
 * The holders since 1922 are in the list in the section on the second creation, though one is mention in the lead and another in the note on the heir apparent.