Talk:Law commission
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
NPOV: Lead paragraph
[edit]I've put a NPOV warning tag on the lead paragraph, because some of the wording strikes me as problematic. It's in the description of how terms are used in different countries:
- The first term is prevalent in the United Kingdom, the second is prevalent in the Commonwealth, and the third one is prevalent in the United States, where "reform" is too strong a term (it necessarily implies the legislature must have been incompetent or corrupt).
There are two problems with the bolded portion, to my mind. First, the statement that the word "reform" is "too strong a term" is not supported by any authority. The entire sentence is uncited, but to go further than simply describe the terminology and ascribe a reason for it, uncited, strikes me as non-neutral. Second, the comment that "reform" is problematic because "it necessarily implies the legislature must have been incompetent or corrupt" does not in fact necessarily follow. One of the major impetuses for law reform is that society has changed in some way, and laws that may have been perfectly acceptable to society in the past now need to be reviewed and possibly reformed. That reasonable possibility, which is mentioned in the paragraph under "Work" does not in any way imply corruption or incompetence on the part of the legislature.
My proposal is simply to delete the speculative part of the sentence, and add a "citation needed" tag:
- "The first term is prevalent in the United Kingdom, the second is prevalent in the Commonwealth, and the third one is prevalent in the United States.[ citation needed ]. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:45, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Law commission. 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://archive.is/20080820003924/http://www.lco-cdo.org/en/index.html to http://www.lco-cdo.org/en/index.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050629235141/http://www.lcc.gc.ca/ to http://www.lcc.gc.ca/
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) 15:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)