Talk:Architects Registration Board

Untitled

This is the page where you discuss differences of opinion in editing articles. - CobaltBlueTony 18:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Reverts

The AARUK website link removed by 217.205.102.250 on 10 April 2007 does not appear either to be "inappropriate" or to contain any instance of "criticism on personal matters". Rather, it is an objective contribution to the public debate on the purpose and operation of this organisation that started in 1997 and which provides useful information.

Thanks for changes Plasmon. No surprises! Restoring your entry and many thanks for objective intervention. Will refer ARB's behaviour to a moderator. Salisian 10:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. See the true nature of 217.205.102.250's contributions at Michael Colvin edit 2 June 2005 - "Fuck ME". Plasmon 12:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Someone at ARB has clearly been set the task of ringfencing this Wikipage. Expect another increase in our retention fees! Salisian 17:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I've no idea why the link to AARUK keeps disappearing - it seems to be a legitimate link with a lot of background information. It seems very petty to keep removing it. Warren Whyte 14:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

It's happened again - and no justification. Would 212.56.92.182 please care to comment here before reverting again? Salisian (talk) 12:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

For the record, the AARUK website is registered to Salisian and Plasmon is his wife. Considering the reasons given for its removal by the different editors that removed it, and the fact that these two users own the website, additional discussion is needed to determine its appropriateness. Thus, it has been removed. Lara 23:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

A request was made on the reliable sources noticeboard regarding this website (permanent link), and it fails to meet our reliability standards in addition to the clear COI issues. Lara 03:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Corrections and additions

This page has been corrected so that the description of the duties aligns with those presribed under the Architects Act 1997. The duties of the Registrar have been outlined. Plasmon 12:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

History?

How long has this organisation been in existence? What was there before it was established? Are there any other organisations like it? What relationships does it have with like organisations internationally? How is it structured? What is the composition of its 'board'? How is it funded? Has there been any controversy at all during its existence? Is there anything wriiten about this organisation that actually establishes its notability? This article doesn't read like an encyclopedia entry. There must be more to this organization and what makes it notable than a very brief description of what it exists to do, which seems to be limited to the function of maintaining a database about architects in the UK. If there isn't any more information to establish notability, perhaps someone needs to put an AfD notice on it? Eyedubya 00:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD notice

ARB is merely an executive administrative body, limited by UK statute; as you say: primarily a list-keeper. However, controversy over what it has claimed as its responsibilities arose even before it was created in 1996, and have been exacerbated since.

You will see from the history of this article that someone from within the organisation expanded the article and was promptly hit by a bot. That perhaps led to some sensitivity which has in turn cautioned others to treat the article with diffidence. However, a correction made a few days ago seems to have survived so perhaps the time for objective expansion of the article is ripe.

See also the links under Category:Architects Registration in the UK, particularly Architects Registration in the United Kingdom and Architects (Registration) Acts, 1931 to 1938 (under peer review). Salisian 05:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

"Certain" responsibilities

The word "certain" to describe the responsibilties held by the Board for standards of conduct and competence is apt because the responsibilities are closely defined in the Architects Act 1997. BoughNirvana's edit is therefore reversed. Further objective improvements in accuracy have been made. 217.46.207.125 16:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Title of article: ARBUK - Architects Registration Board of the United Kingdom

The title of this article should be ARBUK - Architects Registration Board of the United Kingdom, because that's what its content is about. There are other Architects Registration Boards in other parts of the world, whose full names bear the names of the territory within which they register architects. Otherwise, this article should be turned into an article about the generic model of registration for architects by this kind of board wherever it is found. Eyedubya (talk) 10:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Rule of law and PCC

Sionk's revision 06:42, 29 September 2012 (→‎Professional Conduct Committee of the ARB: suffice to mention the ARB's committee and not explain UK law): This was about removing the following:

"Under the rule of law it is normal in the UK to appoint a legally qualified chairman, with appropriate experience, who can be held to have a professional and judicial responsibility for protecting the right to a fair and unprejudiced hearing and trial, which is a basic entitlement of any accused person whose reputation and livelihood could be at stake. The importance of this is reflected in the statutory provisions for constituting the Board's Professional Conduct Committee which are in Part II of Schedule 1 of the Act (as amended)."

That paragraph can be seen as part of an explanation for the introduction of the PCC under the amendments of the 1996/97 legislation. With some rewording there may be a better place for it in another article describing the amending legislation. Qexigator (talk) 08:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Architects Registration Board. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929072508/http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/opinion/topresident039s-podium/law-society039s-new-president-will-focus-039the-rule-law039 to http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/opinion/topresident039s-podium/law-society039s-new-president-will-focus-039the-rule-law039
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120902121245/http://www.arb.org.uk:80/publications/rules_and_policies/general_rules.php to http://www2.arb.org.uk/publications/rules_and_policies/general_rules.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120301001950/http://www.arb.org.uk/news_and_information/information_for_architects/the_architects_act/part_2a.php to http://www.arb.org.uk/news_and_information/information_for_architects/the_architects_act/part_2a.php#4

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)