Template:Did you know nominations/Reclaiming Health and Safety For All

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:29, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Reclaiming Health and Safety For All[edit]

(

)

Ragnar Löfstedt, author of the report

... that the 2011 Löfstedt Report (author pictured) reviewed approximately 200 British health and safety regulations? The focus of this review has been on the 200 or so regulations and the 53 Approved Codes of Practice (ACoPs) owned by the Health and Safety Executive
- ALT1:... that two British construction industry health and safety regulations were revoked as a result of the 2011 Löfstedt Report (author pictured)? I recommend that the following regulations should be revoked: ... The Notification of Tower Cranes Regulations 2010 ... The Construction (Head Protection) Regulations 1989 The Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments) Regulations 2013 were laid before Parliament on 4 March and came into force on 6 April ... The full list of measures being removed are: ... Construction (Head Protection) Regulations 1989 ... Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations 2010

ALT2:... that the 2011 Löfstedt Report (author pictured) proposed to exempt many British self-employed people from health and safety regulations?Key recommendations: Exempting from health and safety law those self-employed whose work activities pose no potential risk of harm to others
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Vadstena Town Hall

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 17:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: While the picture is free, I don't see a compelling reason to use it. ALT2 is the most interesting hook, and is approved. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 14:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)