This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Health and fitness Unassessed This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles 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.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Law Unassessed This 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.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Occupational Safety and Health C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health 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.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Theres that ear again! Do we really need to show a picture of someones ear?--Light current 02:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I intend to remove picture of ear unless someone can justify its retention.--Light current 23:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

tick-tick--Light current 02:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC) Zero hour-- delete!--Light current 22:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why?--Light current 00:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still no answer? It will be removed if no proper answer is forthcoming!--Light current 02:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tick!--Light current 20:15, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is fundamentally flawed. The UK passed the Noise Abatement Act in 1960. See the Noise Abatement Society' webpage for more details.

i think the operative words here are enactment of broad based, enforceable legislation. the early action of the UK is laudable and now in the article intro, but the UK and Japanese actions fall far short of comprehensive attack on environmental noise. the UK laws did not have a basis for strict numerical limits on products and vehicles, nor the stiff fines for non compliance, nor comprehenive directives to local government which would lead to "teeth" in local building and planning standards. today the UK is progressing well but still not operating at the level of designing buildings for example as the U.S. does in local planning oversight. you are welcome to expand the international section, but it is important to be specific regarding what type of noise control each country actually has. i welcome your further involvement. please sign your posts in the future. cheers Covalent 23:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Has trhis hotel been soundproofed? If not, what's it doing here? I will remove it if no satisfactory answers in 2 weeks--Light current 22:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe this article needs a pretty comprehensive rewrite. It seems to violate NPOV and especially fairness of tone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Npov#Fairness_of_tone The entire article takes the stance that noise regulation is a positive and that any slowness in it being implemented is "unfortunate". If I knew a bit more on the subject I would try to do rewrite myself but if someone more knowledgable than me could have a go at it that'd be nice. --BHC 19:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There seems to be very little editing going on, I am beginning to undertake a major rewrite of this article. The content is outdated, irrelevant, or unnecessary. I will attempt to streamline this article to focus on noise regulations, what they are, what they do, any latest updates, but I can only do so for the United States. Other international contributions are very much needed. I am slightly aware of European standards and regulations, but contributions are very much needed from Asia and the rest of the world.

Chuck Kardous - July 9, 2018