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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech 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.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Could somebody explain why the article's references to the act's effects are all in the past tense? Does the act not apply any longer?
LaFoiblesse (talk) 2008-06-07 20:00 (GMT)
The article appears to be a mixture of past and present tense (though primarily past tense). It probably needs a copy edit to make the tense use consistent, though I am unsure of which tense would be most appropriate. The Act is still in force, which would suggest present tense, but large sections of the Act have been repealed, which would suggest past tense. I will have to leave it for someone with greater writing skills than I to decide what to do. Road Wizard (talk) 01:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
