Talk:Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.lawrbit.com/article/digital-personal-data-protection-bill-2023/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:49, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://news.civilserviceindia.com/parliament-passes-digital-personal-data-protection-bill taxguru.in/corporate-law/digital-personal-data-protection-bill-2023.html https://deepstrat.in/2023/08/03/indias-privacy-bill-dpdp-2023-a-detailed-analysis/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Tails Wx (they/them) 02:42, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Unnecessary removal of content

The following are the exemptions under the Act, they are not a copyright violation and are mere mentions from the Act, specify reasons for removal for the following content:

Exemptions

The Act has made exemptions from the regulations related to the Act, they are:

• The processing of personal data is necessary for enforcing any legal right or claim
• The processing of personal data by any court or tribunal or any other body in India which is entrusted by law with the performance of any judicial or quasi-judicial or regulatory or supervisory function, where such processing is necessary for the performance of such function
• Personal data is processed in the interest of prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of any offence or contravention of any law for the time being in force in India
• Personal data of Data Principals not within the territory of India is processed pursuant to any contract entered into with any person outside the territory of India by any person based in India
• The processing is necessary for a scheme of compromise or arrangement or merger or amalgamation of two or more companies or a reconstruction by way of demerger or otherwise of a company, or transfer of undertaking of one or more company to another company, or involving division of one or more companies, approved by a court or tribunal or other authority competent to do so by any law for the time being in force
• The processing is for the purpose of ascertaining the financial information and assets and liabilities of any person who has defaulted in payment due on account of a loan or advance taken from a financial institution, subject to such processing being in accordance with the provisions regarding disclosure of information or data in any other law for the time being in force

Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't that contain copyright violations? Because otherwise... Tails Wx (they/them) 10:31, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Status: Not in force?

I don't understand this. How is it not in force? Hcobb (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

It comes into force on such date as notified by the Central Government of India. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Timeline and Background being seperate

It's better to keep the background timeline seperate because the timeline explicitly implies only to The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 while the background (origins and developments) to the Data Protection Framework is clearly putup in the background which lead to the formation of this Act.

Also this wholly improves the understanding

Editors can give their inputs on this Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 08:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This was not ready for a Good Article nomination.

• The background, overview, rights and provisions, and exemptions sections are all bulleted outlines rather than actual text (WP:GACR 1a)
• The rights and provisions section is entirely unsourced, the exemptions section has only a single primary source (inadequate for any analysis), the non-applicability to offline personal data section is entirely unsourced, the exemptions to government section has an unsourced paragraph, and the Obligation with Convention on the Rights of the Child section has an unsourced sentence. It is not clear that thelogicalindian is a reliable source. (WP:GACR 2b)
• It is not obvious what the Data Protection Board of India section has to do with the topic of the article (WP:GACR 3b)
• There seems to have been significant recent disagreement in the edit history of the article over how much opinion to include (WP:GACR 4)
• Earwig finds large amounts of text directly copied from the bill and not marked as a direct quote (WP:GACR 2d). This also marks a failure to evaluate and describe the bill (GACR 3a); copying the text of the bill does not serve that purpose. If people want to look up the text they can do that; that is not what a Wikipedia article on a bill should be for.

As such, I think it is a quick fail (WP:GAFAIL). —David Eppstein (talk) 08:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I think I fixed the second, third and fifth concerns that were raised. Could you please have a look at the article now and if possible, can help in improving this article to be a good one? Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the first point, that's the background of the bill, right from the Supreme Court's judgement to the creation of data protection framework and the activities that took place till the passage of Act. Could you be more specific on what can be improved in background as it has all the events that took place including the withdrawn PDP bill, 2019. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:33, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The Data Protection Board of India was established as per the provisions in this Act, hence mentioned. Now I have improved it. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:35, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The rights and provisions; exemptions part appear self-explanatory, don't they?

If not, could you please suggest on its improvement? Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 05:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for nominating this article at GAN. Unfortunately, this article is a long way from passing the Well-written criteria, making this a quick fail per WP:GAFAIL. I have also found neturality issues as well. Here is a list of issues that I have found:

Well-written

• There are 5 sections written with only bullet point sentences. I think the two timelines and one background section should be merged together. The reason why I believe these should be merged as there is duplicated content in these sections. They are:
  • 18 November 2022 consultation (3 times), 5 July 2023 revised version (2 times), 3 August 2023 introduction at Lok Sabha (3 times), 7 August 2023 passed in Lok Sabha (2 times), 9 August 2023 passed in Raiya Sabha (2 times), 11 August 2023 assent (2 times).
• Per MOS:EDITORIAL, the 3 sentences that start with "However" should be rewritten.
• I see some grammar issues as well:
  • "Later received criticism from stakeholders, opposition and experts the bill was withdrawn from the Parliament of India on 3 August 2022" - this sentence does not sound right grammatically. Suggested rewording: "After it received criticism from stakeholders, opposition and experts, the bill was withdrawn from the Parliament of India on 3 August 2022."
  • "The report was modified several times later by the Government of India...tabled in the Parliament of India on 11 December 2019" - this sentence is too long. It either needs commas or made into 2 sentences.
  • "The Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023 is the draft version of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023,...making it the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023." This sentence is too long and should be split into multiple sentences.
  • "The MoS has further confirmed, the only exemption is, it can access that data". I Think "the only exemption is" part should be made into a new sentence as it does not doesn't sound correct as written in only one sentence.

For these 5 bullet point sections in the article, the timeline and background sections should be combined together due to the duplicated sentences. The duplicated sentences and sections are a big concern as there are 6 events mentioned multiple times, with two events mentioned three times.

Neutrality issues

• There are sentences that do not specify who these opinions belong to in the Criticism and withdrawal section:
  • "This view is shared by a think tank"
  • "an advisor to a group"
  • "India scholar working with an American co-author"
• Here are some examples of sentences that do not sound neutral in the two criticism sections:
  • "The Wikimedia Foundation is hoping that the PDP bill will prove the lesser evil"
  • "There are serious loopholes of how the bill is unable to identify the scope of governmental bodies"
  • "confuses the idea of informational privacy and leaves much to be desired. "
  • "differs from the original idea of what the law could have been"

These issues in the criticism sections are my main concern as Wikipedia articles need to be written neturally and given attribution to these authors' opinions.

Overall review

Overall, I have found a lot of issues for Criteria #1 well-written and some for Criteria #4 Neutrality. There are 6 events that are duplicated within the article. Additionally, there are sentences that need to be rewritten for editorial and grammar issues. Alternatively, there are sentences that do not state who these opinions are from and sentences that do not sound neutral. I think the 5 bullet point sections, duplicated sentences, unattributed opinions and non-netural sentences should be focused on first. After the well-written and neturality issues are fixes, this article can be renominated to GAN. I hope this review encourages you to fix these issues and renominate. Thank you for submitting this to GAN!

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.