![]() | Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 1, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 8, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
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)
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)
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:
The Act has made exemptions from the regulations related to the Act, they are:
Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't understand this. How is it not in force? Hcobb (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
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 toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 08:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This was not ready for a Good Article nomination.
As such, I think it is a quick fail (WP:GAFAIL). —David Eppstein (talk) 08:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
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:
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.
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, 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!