Talk:Constituent assembly

Untitled[edit]

I have reverted Iota's renaming of this page to "Constituent assembly" (with the lower-case "a"). Reason: Proper nouns should be capitalized. "Constituent Assembly" is a proper noun, just like "National Assembly" or "Indian National Congress." It is not a descriptive noun, but a noun that has been the formal name of numerous legislative bodies and constitutional conventions throughout history. David Cannon 01:09, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The move was obviously too hasty. I disagree with your point though. The word constituent assembly has appeared in the titles of many bodies and as part of a title is of course capitalised. But constituent assemblies are not limited to just those bodies that entitle themselves as such. As I understand it a constituent assembly is any body elected for the purpose of, and with authority to, adopt a constitution, and I'm sure that historically not every such body has called itself "Constituent Assembly of X" (the Democratic Constitutional Congress of Peru is listed in the article so might be an example). So Constituent Assembly (upper case) is a title, but a constituent assembly (lower case) is a type of institution.

This article is currently just a stub. Until I changed it today it was tagged as a disambiguation page. This would be appropriate if the subject matter were just a particular title used by various bodies. But I think there is potential for this to become a detailed article not about a title but about a particular type of political institution. That's why I've changed it to a stub, and why I think lower case is appropriate. I hope I'm making sense.

National Assembly I think is different because national assembly (lower case) is really just a synonym for national legislature. So the National Assembly article is really just about a number of bodies that happen to share a name. Iota 02:33, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I think I can see now where you are coming from. I'll wait to see what other users think, but it might be a good idea to expand the list to include every Constituent Assembly we know of, and rename the article as a list. I'm not sure ... I'm in two minds about that. Maybe you or some others will have some idea. David Cannon 11:04, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Disambiguation[edit]

The above is mostly right, but no one's acted on it, so I went ahead and did it myself. Soo 18:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same as constitutional convention[edit]

This seems to be the same thing as a constitutional convention, a name I would hazard is more common in Anglo-Saxon political traditions. Any objections to a merger? —Felix the Cassowary 07:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A constituent assembly and a constitutional convention are two different things. Constitutional commissions and constituent assemblies differ in that a constitutional commission’s mandate is limited to strictly drafting a new constitution, whereas a constituent assembly may have a much broader mandate. On occasion, a constituent assembly and a constitutional commission may both be utilized during the constitutional drafting process (i.e., Nepal), with the commission being part of the constituent assembly. In addition to drafting a new constitution, a constituent assembly’s mandate may also include other duties and obligations such as amending existing legislation, serving as an interim government during the state’s transition, and drafting regulations governing presidential or parliamentary elections. 116.66.193.244 (talk) 14:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)TFH[reply]

"Not necessarily the ruler"?[edit]

The introduction says that members of the constituent assembly are citizens but "not necessarily" the rulers of the country. "Not necessarily" means that they might be the rulers. So, a constituent assembly is not necessarily different from the other forms of constitution-making. So the sentences after the first add very little, and the intro is quite uninformative. We can replace them with "the members of the constituent assembly must be citizens of the country whose constitution they are creating". -Pgan002 (talk) 06:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Constituent assembly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511193704/http://www.common-place.dreamhost.com/pasley/?page_id=491 to http://www.common-place.dreamhost.com/pasley/?page_id=491

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:34, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge, based on no opposition. Bluealbion (talk) 00:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken out some unsourced material that said there was a big distinction between a constituent assembly and a constitutional convention; one being elected and one not. After doing some research it seems like they essentially treated the same in outside sources with the difference is them being alternative names:

[1]
[2]

I moved over a lot of the information from the constitutional convention page and would suggest merging them. Any thoughts? Bluealbion (talk) 16:55, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Constitution assembly was congress assembly[edit]

constitui 2409:4052:D95:26CF:A899:4B84:8CE8:85D4 (talk) 06:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]