Jump to content

Talk:Government database

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is the RFA?

[edit]

The section on Germany contains the following:

  1. ^ Le modèle RFA, L'Humanité, 3 March 2003, (in French). [dead link‍]

Can anyone suggest a replacement for the dead link? Does anyone know what or who the RFA is? Could it be a typo that should read RAF for Red Army Faction? Any idea what the percentages are about and how they relate to government databases? I've tried to sort this out myself, but with no real success. I am hoping that someone who understands German or French might have more luck. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 03:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I deleted this item. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic content?

[edit]

I flagged several items in the article as possibly being "off-topic". The items just don't seem to be about "Government databases". They seem more about "surveillance", "mass surveillance" or "espionage". Please take a look at the article (scan for "off-topic?") and see what you think. Let me know back here on the talk page. If anyone can find some new references that talk about databases with respect to the flagged items, that would be a big help. If no one expresses serious objections and we don't find new references, I'll delete the flagged items after a few days. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 04:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bgwhite didn't like the use of inline HTML to flag items as "off-topic". The items are now flagged as "not relevant?" using the "Relevance-inline" template. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. I deleted the flagged items. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belgium?

[edit]

I haven't been able to find any sources for the two items in the Belgium section. Can anyone help? If we can't find sources for the statements, the entire Belgium section will need to be deleted. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 11:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I deleted both items and as a result the entire section on Belgium was empty, so that was deleted too. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed, assistance needed

[edit]

Over the last several days I've been working to add references and to remove "citation needed" templates. I've made a lot of progress, but have come to the point where I could use some assistance. There are five "citation needed" templates left in the article. Could others look the article over and see if you can find citations for some of them?

Here is the list:

Belgium
France
United States

For several of these, we really need citations that talk about the database aspects of the topic. If we can't find citations or can't make the items more relevant to an article on databases, I think the content will need to be deleted. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I deleted most of these items. As a result the section on Germany was empty and so I deleted that too. I left the item about Loppsi II since it is part of a longer section that does cite several sources. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Focus of this article?

[edit]

What is or really what should the focus of this article be?

The lead to the article currently reads:

Government databases collect personal information for various reasons, including surveillance, national security, border control, law enforcement, public health, voter registration, vehicle registration, social security, and statistics.

So, the question is should the article cover all "government databases" as suggested by the title or just "government databases that collect personal information" as suggested in the lead? --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article current reads as a list of government databases, in which case it should probably be moved to the plural, government databases, as a class of items per WP:PLURAL. Otherwise, it should be written to describe a government database in the general sense, perhaps including applications and benefits in general, or methods and laws governing collection, use, and protection. ENeville (talk) 04:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On 21 October User:ENeville edited the lead so that it agrees with the title. The rewritten lead now reads:
A government database collects personal information for various reasons, including surveillance, national security, border control, law enforcement, public health, voter registration, vehicle registration, social security, and statistics.
Thanks. This is better. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:10, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As User:ENeville suggested, I think the article should be renamed to be "Government databases". There is already a #REDIRECT with that name, so some fooling around will be needed to make the change and preserve the history. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:10, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But this leaves the original question, should the article cover all "government databases" or just "government databases that collect personal information"? --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:10, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Government database. 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:

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

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Government database. 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:

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

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 18:55, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Government_database&oldid=1198302483"