Talk:Publicly Available Specification

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[edit]

Why are some specifications called PAS and some BSI PAS? Biscuittin 17:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is a BSI PAS a PAS which has become a formal British Standard? Biscuittin 17:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication[edit]

This article duplicates part of the British Standards article. Biscuittin 21:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

I've marked this as NPOV. It reads like something the BSI itself might publish, indeed it talks about "we" being able to do things and as such falls short of wikipedia standards. 82.68.102.190 (talk) 11:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising PAS[edit]

This looks like a BSI advertisement for PAS. They don't mention, that PAS is not applicable for health & safety, environmental safety etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.10.52.10 (talk) 14:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

COI editor[edit]

Alkazzi, it would be good if you could declare what seems like an obvious conflict of interest editing this and other BSI related pages.

I saw you not only took the proposed deletion sign off, but also the advert flag, which is an illegit removal in my opinion. IN you edit summary you only said you were adding a few BSI refs ( not quite homest). Those refs dont change the fact that this sounds like an ad at all - in fact they make the case stronger, so I will add the flag again.--Wuerzele (talk) 04:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for drawing my attention to this - some of the recent deletes have removed some of the worst material (that was basically just puff). BSI is notable (and I guess PAS's probably are) but there is still a risk that this ends up being a purely self-serving puff piece. BSI staff should be very careful about editing BSI pages and make it clear what they are up to. Francis Davey (talk) 18:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]