Talk:UK government to spy on phone, email, browsing, of entire population

Review

Revision 705319 of this article has been reviewed by Gopher65 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Dude... have these people never read 1984? Gopher65talk 04:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 705319 of this article has been reviewed by Gopher65 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Dude... have these people never read 1984? Gopher65talk 04:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Style Issues

The article seems pretty solid, but I think there are a few things that could use work.

1. Where are the wikilinks? What's the point of having wikilinks if they are not used.

2. Is spies/spying too loaded of a word? Shouldn't spying refer to an illegal act, and if this was inacted would it be illegal? This article does not say specicically whether or not a law will be enacted to enable the "spying." The article does say: "Under the UK's current law a warrant is required to intercept communications, but that will change with the implementation of the new database." But change how?

3. This article isn't written for an international audience, for instance, who's the Queen? (I know, but others may not.) What's a Shadow Home Secretary? I don't know. Sounds sinister though.

4. Are there any people that support this measure (or programme) that have been quoted? It's important to have quotes for both sides.

Anyways, these are just my thoughts. —Calebrw (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

@Gopher65: I have never read 1984. Poor school system I grew up in. ;) —Calebrw (talk) 17:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Read it now. Anonymous101^talk 17:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Spying to me seems like exactly what it is, just a shortened version of 'monitoring' or 'wiretapping' but is more inclusive. If you want to change it, go ahead, though I disagree. As for the change how part, it's a bit obvious--if a warrant is required and that changes, obviously it no longer is. It's inferred yes but it's a bit redundant it seems to say "Under the UK's current law a warrant is required to intercept communications, but with the new database a warrant will no longer be required", though change it if you like. As for people who support it, we'll have to wait until the Queen speaks it seems. And as for the queen...honestly I think anyone can guess who that is, the Queen of Britain >>; --Poisonous (talk) 00:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

WN:NPOV issues

There seems to be a heated debate in the UK about this, yet only the views of those opposed are presented. That ought to be fixed. If this is close to becoming law there must be proponents out there and they can't be hard to find. --SVTCobra 00:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)