Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law Enforcement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This non-article page is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess. Remember, the project aims for no vandalism and no conflict, if an article needs attention regarding vandalism or breaches of wikiquette, please add it to the article watch list.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating.
Shortcut:
WT:LE

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Law Enforcement page.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

.


Contents

[edit] Barnstar Proposal

Hi everyone!

I was looking around at some other WikiProjects, and I noticed that many of them have a Project Specific Barnstar Award. And, seeing that our Project does not have a Barnstar Award, I decided to go and make one. I would like to propose that this become the official Barnstar Award for our Wikiproject. If anyone would like to change the Image shown on the Barnstar or the wording of the Barnstar feel free to do so, the template can be found at Template:Law Enforcement Barnstar.

So without further ado here is the proposed barnstar.


Code= {{subst:Law Enforcement Barnstar}}


The Law Enforcement Barnstar
I Mifter (talk) hereby present you, WikiProject Law Enforcement with the Law Enforcement Barnstar, for your great contributions to the field of Law Enforcement Articles on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! Mifter (talk) 15:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


This is the Barnstar not subseted.


Code= {{Law Enforcement Barnstar}}


The Law Enforcement Barnstar
I ~~~ hereby present you, {{subst:BASEPAGENAME}} with the Law Enforcement Barnstar, for your great contributions to the field of Law Enforcement Articles on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! ~~~~


I would love to hear your opinion on this proposal :)!--Mifter (talk) 15:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I like it! Well done on the creation of it very nice. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) 15:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Likewise! Incidentally, someone needs to archive this page soon! I would do it if I had not just got off 4 hours of solid essay writing :( SGGH speak! 22:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
See my contribs... nearly five hours! SGGH speak! 22:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Sorry...

Sorry for being away for ageesssss.

Just recently too busy for Wikipedia etc... :(

But have recently invested in a BlackBerry, so I can hopefully get back into the spirit of things :)

Hows everyone doing?

Regards Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 19:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome Back!! Not much has happened in you absence :), the only thing of note that I can think of is my new Barnstar proposal which is the topic above this one ;). Anyways, Welcome Back, --Mifter (talk) 19:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Its Dep. Garcia on BlackBerry, ahh thanks for the update :) Regards 195.189.143.43 (talk) 20:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back! Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) 07:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

So what's forward is one at the moment, I know one has just finished but is there anything I can do? In the meantime I'll clear out the unrated articles section :) Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 17:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The Third Forward has just gone, but you might as well amount some stuff for the next one and hopefully win some awards. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) 17:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, right ok :) shall do! Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 17:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
An officers work is never done, eh Dep? SGGH speak! 09:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Also: "once a copper, always a copper". Not spoke to you for long time. How's it going? How's specials? Regards Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 14:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Rocks, as always. Love it SGGH speak! 16:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Excellent =) Glad you love it. Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 17:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk Page Archived

Hi everyone, per SGGH's request, I have just archived our project's talk page. The archive can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law Enforcement/Archive 7, by clicking on the Aug 28th 07 - April 16th 08 link in the archive box at the top of the page, or by clicking the number 7 next to the word archive in the talk page header. Thanks, --Mifter (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mifter SGGH speak! 09:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Symbol

The barnstar topic above reminded me, I asked the wonderful User:Red Gown if she could design us a new logo for the project. I believe it is coming along though I haven't seen any sketches yet. I shall upload the new one for comments when it is ready. SGGH speak! 07:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds Good, from the Image that she has drawn and had you up-load (Found here), she appears to be an accomplished artist :). I can't wait to see the new logo :).--Mifter (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I can definetly get a few thumbnail sketches generated to see what everyone prefers. Would like to do a vectored drawing with the type, but might have to settle for a non digital version in the meantime (until I can get Illustrator CS3 set up here). Glad to help! Red Gown (talk) 00:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Taser RfC

An RfC has been opened at Talk:Taser#RFC: Criticism. Flatscan (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quality / consistency of LEA stub and start class articles - a solution ?

Folks,

I have been browsing around Wikipedia now for a few months and am somewhat saddened by the poor state of many stub and start class articles. And, law enforcement agency articles are not immune . . . I do realise though that is an inherent problem with the nature of Wikipedia . . .

It occured to me that if the article creators could be given a running start, that this might help to get better quality articles, sooner.

To this end I have put together an article generator, which will generate stub / start class articles, by allowing article creators to simply fill in a template.

The first cut of this article generating template can be found at User:Pee Tern/Sandbox/Template/Gen stub Law enforcement agency.

An example of a generated article cab be found at User:Pee Tern/Sandbox/Template/Gen stub Law enforcement agency/example.

Initial documentation is available at User:Pee Tern/Sandbox/Template/Gen stub Law enforcement agency/doc.

What do people think ?

Is it viable ?

Comments please, before I do much more work on it.

If it is a goer, what should THE standard be / look like / sections / section titles, etc. ?

Peet Ern (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

My only thought at the moment, apart from that this is a very good, well thought out idea, is that you might want to offer a simpler option as well, as in few cases do users have access to all that information. ... SGGH speak! 12:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks SGGH. I am not sure if you mean a simpler template, or perhaps not scare (new) Wikipedians by offering up a simpler example. If editors do not have the data they simply do not provide it. For example, see User:Pee Tern/Sandbox/Template/Gen stub Law enforcement agency/simpleexample for example. Peet Ern (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
As I have said before, I am opposed to the growing use of templates and infoboxes in Wikipedia. I appreciate you have put a lot of work into this template and well done for that, but I'm afraid I can't support the incresed use of these things. They're far too rigid and I believe they're a hindrance, rather than an aid, to good article writing. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Obviously I think more templates are a good idea. However, I am not sure that we are in fundamental disagreement. I am definitely not suggesting that articles should be templated. I too would very strongly agree that this would stifle good and lateral encyclopdic content. Here I am only trying to get people off to a better start than they have now, to get better encylcopedic content. I would hope that if this approach is adopted then there would be a "policy" that generated stubs / start class articles should be subst:ed as soon as possible and there after edited manually. Peet Ern (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Security police - appropriateness?

Folks,

I refer you to Security police, and see apparently long standing issues in Talk:Security police.

IMHO this article has many issues and is so bad it possibly should be deleted. Does any one have any references to validate that security police is a real term?

A google for security police gives the top hit as the Wikipedia one!

A google for "security police" leads me to believe the term is not common, and only applies in a relatively small number of specific instances, which should be agency/organisation articles anyway.

If I can get hold of something to refer to the term, I might consider doing a dewrite, about the 'term', rather than about 'agencies of this type'. If not, perhaps it should be nominated for deletion?

Peet Ern (talk) 05:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I must admit, when I first saw the article a while back "Security Police" meant nothing to me. Despite being heavily interested in policing topics I had never come across it, I also question if the title is a "real term". Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) 09:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Security police is certainly a real term. It's been in use for many years and in many languages. However, it's usually used to refer to national political/secret police forces (e.g. the Nazi Sicherheitspolizei) and, as the article states, used to be used to refer to private security forces in the UK (I can vouch for this latter, as I work in an archive which holds relevant material). However, I too had never heard the usage in the context mostly described before reading this article - to me the term suggests totalitarian states. Therefore, it shouldn't be deleted, but more corroborative evidence probably needs to be collected of this particular usage. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Prisons

If anyone's interested, I've proposed a new wikiproject for the creation of articles regarding specific prisons here. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 20:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LEA powers - new article

Folks,

If any one is interested - I have put up a new article Law enforcement agency powers.

I suggest that specific LEA powers are now categorised in Category:Law enforcement agency powers, which I have made a sub category of Category:Law enforcement techniques.

There might be a few more techniques which I will move from techniques to powers over time.

Peet Ern (talk) 07:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Oak Bay Police Department

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Oak Bay Police Department, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? KenWalker | Talk 17:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

This article now has an Afd Tag on it. Please go to the articles page to help keep this article.EMT1871 (talk) 00:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

In light of the above AfD, I think we need to decide on some criteria for notability, or if some already exist then find them, for police departments. Any ideas, do some exist already? SGGH speak! 10:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)