Talk:Crime in Estonia

message: Please no merge.. write more..read more..learn more. --Cool Cosmos 20:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: wow signed by clicking. --Cool Cosmos 20:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The article has encyclopedic potential as a standard sub-topic for each country. Crime is a vital article, so articles about crime in a country are sub-topics of the crime article. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: No merge

message: This article is beyond salvation. We should scrap this whole garbage and start anew, this time with better approach, such like Crime in Canada or Crime in the United States has. Maybe we can then avoid ridiculous edits () and such from users who are not looking to improve Wikipedia, only further their personal POV. -- Sander Säde 07:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Edits like that  are essentially vandalism. Crime in the United States would be a good example to base an article on. What PasswordUsername is trying to do is equivalent to quoting every single minor crime from every single possible source to try to paint a distorted picture of the country. And then all the OR about "groups" w/o sources. How about some international comparisons and aggregate statistics instead?radek (talk) 07:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What I am trying to do is present a well-drawn profile of the historical criminal situation in the country, and as it is now. You guys are really preventing me from proceeding in this manner. I didn't write anything about groups. You're accusing me of things I haven't even done. PasswordUsername (talk) 07:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What in the world does this: "I am trying to do is present a well-drawn profile of the historical criminal situation in the country" mean? Please look at comparable articles, like Crime in United States or Crime in Canada for comparison/basis. This isn't a coatrack to drag out every insignificant "real crime" in Estonia newspaper story. And of course, it all needs to be source, which it ain't right now.radek (talk) 08:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

text: It's deft how promptly you posted this, Mr. Sade. All of that is perfectly well-addressed. You're deluding yourself if you think child molestation is not a major problem in the Vaabarik. PasswordUsername (talk) 10:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

text: If the rate of child molestation is really very high compared with other EU members, I can't see why should it be omitted here. It's an ugly topic, sure, but it doesn't mean this does not exist; and so is the whole topic Crime in Estonia. Just a recent piece on a 'hot Estonian guy' and a 12 (!) year old girl: (Postimees), gtranslate. Miacek (t) 10:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current state of the article  

message: I am starting to collect sources to rewrite the article; as it is a way too big of a piece for me to bite alone, please, do help with both sources and rewriting. -- Sander Säde 08:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collecting sources 

message: For those interested, .  Eleven convicted of crimes ranging from embezzlement to illegal hunting.  But I'm not sure if this fits into this article; maybe we should instead cover general trends rather than individual incidents. Дигвурен ДигвуровичАллё? 19:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kapo has closed an interesting case 

message: I have moved the Trafficking in Persons Report into a separate section because this seems the most sensible option, and not just because I've just added a ton of text that probably needs hacking down to size by someone with better editing skills than I. One of the problems with a page on crime is that it's a moving target: references a decade old, describing how things were shortly after the break up of the soviet union, aren't really even relevant any more.
This report is the main international source for comparative trafficking analysis, updated annually, and merging it with information from other reports would cause significant problems for editors/maintainers: they'll have to establish (as I just had to) whether a sentence was from the now-obsolete TIP report of a previous year, or from some other source.
If something in a section being maintained contradicts the information being added, a maintainer needs to be able to tell whether it is because the state of affairs has changed (in which case the maintainer can either throw out the obsolete information, or retain it as a historical note); or whether it is because there is disagreement amongst sources (in which case the maintainer should highlight the disagreement).
If TIP-report info is mixed with other sources, then we'd need to tackle this confusion annually. DewiMorgan (talk) 20:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trafficking in Persons Report