Talk:Reactions to global surveillance disclosures
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Reactions to global surveillance disclosures article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Plural
[edit]Usually these disclosures are referred to in the plural, although Snowden's disclosure is over, the disclosures in the press, those we are recording here, are plural and ongoing. petrarchan47tc 23:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
So we have:
- Aftermath isn't even the correct word. The disclosures are ongoing yet the events described in this article occurred in the past. "Reactions to global surveillance disclosures" is my choice. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Requested move
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Aftermath of the global surveillance disclosure → Reactions to global surveillance disclosures – "The disclosures are ongoing" Anonymouscoward2421 (talk) 17:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- Support the proposed rename, to more accurately describe the contents of the article. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Restore the Fourth
[edit]Would anyone care to do the honors and merge Restore the Fourth into this article? Proposal here, no response after two weeks. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Lots of information removed
[edit]Could editors take a look at this, I'm not sure where all the removed information has gone. I know there was an attempt to add some back to the Snowden article, which is silly as these spin off articles were created because the main article is packed. petrarchan47tc 07:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
No citation of the HTTPS-massive-adoption as reaction
[edit]See the statistical growth of HTTPS from 2013 onwards... And its explosion after 2016, when cost barriers were overcome: see for example https://letsencrypt.org/stats/ and campaigns like Mozilla's https://blog.mozilla.org/internetcitizen/2017/04/21/https-protect/
Krauss (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Stub-Class articles with conflicting quality ratings
- Stub-Class psychology articles
- Mid-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- Stub-Class sociology articles
- Mid-importance sociology articles
- Start-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class articles with conflicting quality ratings
- B-Class International relations articles
- High-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- Start-Class Mass surveillance articles
- High-importance Mass surveillance articles
- Start-Class Globalization articles
- Mid-importance Globalization articles