1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 4, 2013. ( Reviewed version).

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about 1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about 1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions at the Reference desk.

1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

A fact from 1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 July 2013 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that in the UK, actors were employed to speak the words of certain people whose voices were banned from the airwaves because of broadcasting restrictions introduced in 1988? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/July.

The terms " extremist", " terrorist" and " freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here.

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article: You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances) Neutrality: All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 16, 2016 and October 19, 2018.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Ireland High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Northern Ireland Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland 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.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Irish Republicanism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish Republicanism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Irish republicanism and Irish nationalism related topics 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.Irish RepublicanismWikipedia:WikiProject Irish RepublicanismTemplate:WikiProject Irish RepublicanismIrish Republicanism articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics of the United Kingdom High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Television High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Radio High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary) Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane Maintain : Portal:Radio Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs Verify : Unreferenced BLPs Other : Collaboration of the Week: Requests for Radio peer review: Rod Serling The Howard Stern Show The History of Rock & Roll American Top 40; The Museum of Curiosity; Scott Mills (radio show) BBC High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks for WikiProject BBC: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary) Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland NPOV : Criticism of the BBC ( See comments) Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles Other : *Restructure the category Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC Return Dad's Army to a Good article. ( See comments) Reassess BBC following improvements to article. Journalism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Freedom of speech High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:1988–94 British broadcasting voice restrictions/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ritchie333 ( talk · contribs) 10:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply

As I've already read and commented on the article, and personally remember the ban, I'm happy to review.

General

• No problems with external links or disambigs. Brilliant.

• Is there any reason you picked the Sinn Féin offices as the lead infobox picture? In my view, a picture of Gerry Adams, by far the most obvious indication that the ban was happening to the average person, would be better. The BBC seem to agree, as their source here shows a picture of him in the foreground. File:Gerry Adams reading into mic.jpg might be a good candidate, as it shows him publicly speaking.
  • Done.

Background

• Can you confirm that the entirety of the first paragraph is cited to the BBC source? I'm struggling to find where it states that the major British television networks were specifically required to stop or delay broadcasting - it does mention "high profile struggles over particular programmes" in relation to Real Lives but not much else.
  • Added ref from Moloney and slightly reworded sentence. Should cover it now.

• The Moloney source states that it was specifically Thatcher who demanded the footage of the Corporals killings - worth specifying this? There's a quotation from The Independent in that source that could also be used.
  • Done.

The ban

• The article states that the ban extended to all republican and loyalist groups, plus Sinn Féin, but the BBC source states 11. Because we rely on verifiability, not truth, I'd prefer to go with exactly what the source says.
  • The ban actually covered ten organisations and Sinn Fein. This Guardian ref should cover it.

• If the ban was discussed in the house of Commons on 2/11/88, there will be a log of it in Hansard - the link is here and might well be worth using as an additional source. IMHO Hansard is a brilliant source for mining direct quotes and opinions from MPs, and it goes back to the 19th century.
  • Done.

More later. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply

• Marmaduke Hussey, Chairman of the BBC, called the ban a "very dangerous precedent" - a direct quotation needs a citation.
  • Done.

Implementation

• Can you clarify exactly where in the Moloney source cites that the ban was retrospectively applied to archive material?
  • Added note with quote from text.

• The BBC source commenting on the IRA's food spokesman's opinions on sausage rolls being banned as "This demonstrated the surreal nature of the restrictions." is probably worth weaving into the article (if it's not implicitly obvious!)
  • Added extra sentence with Welch's quote.

Lifting of regulations

• Link to the Hansard transcript of John Major reviewing the ban in November 1993 with Jill Knight here. Already sourced to the Irish Times, but this direct link makes verification easier.
  • Done.

• "Conservative MPs wanted more rigid restrictions" - the source given explicitly states it was "Many Conservative backbenchers and Unionist MPs", and this might be worth clarifying.
  • Done.

• Hansard link for Major upholding the ban in February 1994 here - also refers to Gerry Adams' visit to the US around this period which was dubbed in the UK but nowhere else
  • Done. Couldn't find a mention of upholding the ban, but added it as a source for Adams' US visit. Mention of maintaining the ban may be in the next day's Hansard as it appears to have been announced on 4 February, but I haven't found the corresponding page. Can you help?

• I think the sentence starting "The UK ban was lifted" wants to go in a separate paragraph - it's a definitive point in the whole story and deserves to stand out.
  • Done.

• "On the same day Major announced that ten minor roads" - the source given just says "roads" and mentions they were all specifically in County Fermanagh. I thought it might be something to do with the George Mitchell Peace Bridge ( source), part of the major road from Cavan to Enniskillen, but that was destroyed in 1972 and not restored until 1999.
  • Done. I've seen another source that refers to them as "rural roads", though a rural road isn't necessarily a minor one, I guess.

Images

• No copyright problems.

• File:John Simpson.jpg might be worth adding to the "Analysis section" with his quote about how the ban affected his work.
  • Done.

Lead

• Sometimes known as the "Broadcast ban" or "Northern Ireland Notice" - these two terms are not cited, and not mentioned again in the article's body with a cite.
  • Removed. Tony Hall refers to it as the "Northern Ireland Notice", but I haven't seen the name used elsewhere.

GA Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a ( major aspects): b ( focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I don't see any significant problems - fundamentally this article meets the GA criteria. I'll put it On Hold just so the last few issues can be resolved. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:48, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the review. Everything addressed now apart from the Hansard thing. Let me know if you can get to it. I also recall the ban, though I have to confess I was unaware of the more surreal aspects of it until I started work on this article. Thanks again. Paul MacDermott ( talk) 17:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC) reply

I don't think the Hansard issue is relevant to passing GA - possibly for FA, but as it stands the information is cited inline to a reliable source (The Independent 5/2/94) and marked in the "References" section, which meets the GA criteria, so I'm happy to say this is a Pass. Well done. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Fantastic. Thanks again for reviewing this. Paul MacDermott ( talk) 10:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC) reply

The effects of this subject have been revisited in recent times following the 2013 Woolwich attack. I'd like to add a paragraph on it, but thought I should post it here first for comment. My chief concern is getting the language right. I'll also mention this at Talk:Death of Lee Rigby. The paragraph is as follows:

The broadcast ban came under the spotlight again in 2013, after the BBC aired an interview with Anjem Choudhary, the leader of a banned Islamist group, in the aftermath of the fatal stabbing of an off-duty British soldier by two men who expressed extreme Islamist views. ^[1] After Choudhary refused to condemn the attack on an edition of Newsnight, Conservative Home Secretary Theresa May said she was considering giving the media regulator Ofcom the power to prevent future interviews with members of banned organisations. ^[2] However, the plans were criticised by senior politicians and commentators. ^[2] Recalling the broadcast ban Jack Straw, a Home Secretary under the previous Labour administration called it "one of the most intolerant and least successful" measures introduced by Thatcher's government, which acted as a "great recruiting sergeant" for the groups concerned. ^[2] The author and historian Timothy Garton Ash called the idea "impractical" and suggested it would be as ineffective as it had been in the 1980s. ^[1]

Any thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Thanks Paul MacDermott ( talk) 13:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC) reply

References