Talk:Office for Tackling Injustices

Grammar
and given that it has recently been revealed that this office never existed how could the grammar be changed to reflect this? John Cummings (talk) 15:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I was pondering this as I was updating the page. I'm minded to give it a few days to see whether there are any further developments: if not, I think we can safely change things from present to past tense. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 15:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's hard to say whether the office should be written as existing or having existed and it probably shouldn't continue to be described as a UK government body created on 12 July 2019 if it has never actually assembled. Agree with to wait to see if there is any more clarification. Andysmith248 (talk) 19:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * and, agreed, wait a bit, although it appears it never existed and seems unlikely it will be created in the near future. The question then seems to be whether it should be called 'proposed' or something like 'fictitious' (if government had said it was real but they knew it was not). John Cummings (talk) 12:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think "fictitious" might imply some degree of intentional mendacity on the part of Theresa May and her minions: probably best to stick with "proposed". Regardless of the final wording, the whole article will probably be a credible AfD nominee in a couple of years. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 13:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree to go with proposed. How does 'a proposed UK government body announced on 12 July 2019' sound? Andysmith248 (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me! ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 13:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Albeit almost a year later, ✅! Andysmith248 (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)