Talk:Public records

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconUnited States
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLiterature
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconBooks
WikiProject icon
WikiProject iconLaw High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sex offenders

[email protected]

Self-Reference

I removed the following, per Wikipedia policy to

avoid self-reference. This seems like the sort of thing that belongs in Wikipedia name space. Skittle
20:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 9i9hyfrxhnjfrdygtyt υὰὴ̯ᾼᾶᾲᾼᾐ[1]—°≥≤≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:8324:3E30:A41F:90E2:3A96:689B (talk) 23:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ →→→≥≤

Public records in the scope of Wikipedia itself

This encyclopedia itself theoretically uses forms of public records in its own right, the

open-source
, freely-editable encyclopedia.

Public Records in the US

I thought that this article deserved a section about public records in the US (particularly about the differences in accessibility by state), so I added one. Any thoughts from others? Phyrne22 20:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems both deficient and incorrect: There is no mention of First Amendment right to access court records to inspect and to copy, a common law right, which was re-affirmed by the US Supreme Court in Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978). Access to court dockets is listed as governed by the Freedom of Information Act, where in fact it is governed by the First Amendment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.104.7 (talk) 09:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The right to access court records is also central to liberty: There is no conceivable way to exercise the Habeas Corpus right, deemed by the late Justice Brennan[8] as "the cornerstone" of the United States Constitution, absent access to court records as public records."

This is a very bold claim, that is not explained in any way. Also no citation is given. Even a google search on the connection between public accessibility of court records and habeas corpus turns up nothing of consequence. I am inclined to believe that it is not only an opinion, but also wrong. 5.199.241.177 (talk) 10:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Historic Perspective

The concept of public records is a key concept to democracy and the rule of law. The article in its current form does injustice to the subject. As only one example: It can be argued that absent court records as public records, the Habeas Corpus right, deemed by the late Justice Brennan as "the cornerstone" of the American Constitution, could not be practiced. It would be worthwhile to cover the origins of the concept and its evolutions as the "common law right to access court records - to inspect and to copy", and the significance of the distinct two rights - to inspect and to copy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.104.7 (talk) 09:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The definition

The definition currently given at the top of the article is way too narrow to be accurate, and I feel has been made worse by recent edits.


This makes sense as a starting point:

The California Government Code defines public records as, “…any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristic.” For example, public records can include, but are not limited to, papers, books, maps, charts, photographs, audiotapes, videotapes, and information stored on a computer. Source.

Agreed?--Elvey (talk) 06:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

Neutrality of controversy sections seems questionable. Author seems to be arguing that data mining is beneficial. 90.157.234.124 (talk) 13:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 16:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
]