Talk:Smoking bans in the United Kingdom

Sign
Note: I changed the sign in question because the original piece was under Crown Copyright (a non-free licence), and under Images, free licenses are preferred over non-free licences. 159753 16:58, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Iffy quote
"The argument that passive smoke harms others is denied by Freedom To Choose and many scientists including some that are directly involved with the anti-smoking movement."

This quote does provide a reference, but the reference is a heavily biased Blogspot page. Get rid of it? Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 13:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a dead end link anyway. It doesn't point to the quote in question which has probably been archived. I've searched the July archive and can't find the quote. But in direct answer WP:VERIFY states "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources" - so the intended quote needs to be found and if it's a quote of a quote an original source for the quote is needed, if it's the blog author stating it without a source then given the blog's point of view on the subject, it would be on very shaky ground. - X201 15:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Smoking ban.gif
Image:Smoking ban.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What is meant by "smoke"
Smoke can originate from many different sources, such as tobacco, cannabis, water vapour, other herbs. Can we have a clarification on this... for example can I smoke herbal cigarettes that are tobacco free, or can I smoke a shisha waterpipe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.216.20 (talk) 14:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Title
This article is only about the smoking ban, so either the title should be changed or something should be written about smoking in England unrelated to the ban. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.157.28 (talk) 13:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Smoking ban in England. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article672477.ece
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930032749/http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4309.htm to http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4309.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Are closed workplaces just for smokers or smoking rooms legal?
I must start by saying the following: Neither beeing British nor living in England or somewhere else in the UK, my question might sound stupid for an Englishmen or another Briton. However, I understand the ban in that way that it would be legal to let smoke a single worker in a closed office or other workplace. But what about when two or more smokers would share a closed workplace? And what about the establishment of smoking rooms? Of course, under the condition that this rooms were only accessed by smokers during working hours and are properly separated from the other areas. This could maybe understand as a telelogical reduction of the law... On the other hand, of course, the active smokers sharing such a room would be exposed to additional passive smoke. However, this argument is weak in my view, since the government does not need to protect anyone against his will as long the behaviour itself is legal.--Blaubeermarmelade (talk) 21:41, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I’m not sure this is the right place for legal advice, but the law refers to places that are either open to the public or used as a place of work by more than one person. If only part of a workplace meets those conditions, then only that part is smoke-free. (That is, if there’s an area not open to the public and only ever used by one individual, that individual can smoke there if they wish.) There’s no exemption for indoor ‘smoking rooms’ in general; as you can see in the article, there are sometimes ‘smoking shelters’, but these would be outdoors and not enclosed.
 * As far as the justifications for government regulation go, that would be a matter for someone to discuss with their MP, if they were so inclined. aaltotoukka (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2019 (UTC)