Talk:Vigilantism

message: Perhaps someone can write a paragraph on vigilante justice (since this is the redirect page) in the American prison system?  A recent example can be: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-08-25-edit_x.htm
3/30/05
Wondering if anyone knows about the history of vigilantism: vigilantes in the medieval era, etc.?
Removed Minutemen from list of vigilantes. The article admits that they are "technically not a vigilante group", and hence their inclusion is propaganda.
Anyone want to touch on the issues of Vigilantism, ie., positives, negatives, ethics etc?
It is arguable that Batman is a vigilante. He is far from The Punisher. He never kills. As it says above, vigilintes use methods like torture and killing enemies, Batman does not.
:My opinion: Batman is indeed a vigilante. As I understood in the article, vigilante is a law enforcer not officialized by the Government. Not necessarily mean. 200.230.213.152 03:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. 200.230.213.152 03:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. The Minutemen are a classic vigilante group. "Typical motive of a vigilante" is a weasel phrase. I'm restoring Minutemen to the article. "Equitable justice"? Find a source for that claim. Bobanny 22:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that White Supremacist groups should be taken out.  Webster's Dictionary defines a vigilante as "a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily", and last time I checked it wasn't a crime to be black or jewish. And by the way, Minutemen aren't White supremacists. They are anti illegal immigration.  There are some non whites in the group. Rundar 23:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005-2007 discussion

message: Can anyone find a picture for this article. I'd put Batman but he is only one person. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 15:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Dirty Harry - Harry Callahan is a police officer,acting in these condition; he can be considered a "vigilante"? Perhaps "Magnum Force" is more appropriate.
The Outlaw Josey Wales,V for Vendetta -  they are "rebels", not exactly "vigilantes". --194.65.151.249 15:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is shallow; the concept of vigilantes preceded films of the 1960s as it goes back to myths of Western Frontier "justice".--Parkwells 20:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides Westerns, there were some vigilantes in crime films going back to the 1930s. "The Beast Of The City" (1932), "Cornered" (1945) and "The Big Heat" (1953) being a few examples. Vigilantism does pop up in film noir, the genre which the latter two films pertain to and the first mentioned is an important predecessor to.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.208.216 (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movies 

message: This article desperately needs some history. I'm no expert, but I believe the modern connotation of "Vigilante" comes from San Francisco Vigilance Movement in the mid-19th century US. I might be wrong, and maybe that's just an example and not the origin, but some research needs to be done to give this article some grounding. Right now, it's just anyone who takes the law into their own hands, which can encompass so much as to be unencyclopedic. And I agree that rebels, renegades, and mavericks are different than vigilantes. Bobanny 19:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: Looking at the article on the Vehm in Westphalia it was a legal institution rather a vigilante group. Should we remove them from this article?--Korovioff 18:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vehm

message: There is this slashdot article on this computer hacker who breaks the law and sends a judge to 27 years in jail. .  He broke California penal code 502 .  The person who submitted that article claims the kid is a vigilante.  Does vigilante require the negative connotation associated with it?  Usually dictionary definitions do not carry connotations.  This would be kind of strange since it would be like a whistleblower or something like that.  LAWL a nonviolent vigilante.  I usually associate vigilante as like being Hollywood type. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Getonyourfeet (talk • contribs) 13:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say there's a negative connotation with vigilante, but it depends on the perspective of the audience. J. Jonah Jameson, for example, doesn't like Spider-Man because he's a vigilante, and by definition, vigilantes operate outside or in defiance of the law and are therefore criminal. Most of the stuff I've read on the San Francisco Committee of Vigilance, which epitomizes vigilantism and is the historical origin for our modern associations with the term, are sympathetic to those vigilantes. It seems to come down to whether or not you believe the vigilante is justified in operating outside or in defiance of the law. In mid-19th century San Francisco, the feeling was that lawlessness was too much for the existing "law" to deal with, so the vigilance committee was seen as justified in taking illegal measures to establish law and order. The Hollywood cliche of the vigilante action hero, I believe, is so popular because it's a vehicle for exploring the theme of justice through the perspective of an individual. I don't think vigilantes are necessarily violent, but remember that "the law" vigilantes are substituting for has a monopoly on legitimate violence. Even if the cop is giving you a friendly warning, he's still ready to use that gun in his holster if he thinks it appropriate, or electrial outlet if it's Jack Bauer and he thinks you know something about the visitors. Bobanny 20:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The actual definition given at the start of the article is really good ("A vigilante is a person or persons who ignore due process enacting their own form of justice when they deem the response of the authorities to be insufficient") because it makes the clear distinction of ignoring due process, and participating in the process.  Whether you regard that as negative is a matter of personal perspective but I'd certainly regard that as negative in a civil society.    LyallDNZ 05:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Do vigilantes have to be violent and face-to-face

message: This article needs heavy copy-editing for syntax and grammar. It appears that most of it was written by a single individual, to whom English is apparently a second language. It's well-sourced, but very tough to read.
Furthermore, the weasel words need to go. Historians don't "believe" anything. They've either had a fact/opinion quoted by a reputable, cited source, or they've done the same in one of their own publications. Period. Bullzeye 17:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree this needs a good copyedit, but disagree that "historians believe" is a weasel phrase. Historians are a very opionated lot, and do more than just reiterate what people in the past said. They interepret sources and then tell us what they "believe" happened based on that. The wording could be better, but there are references that point to said historians, so I'm removing the weasel tag; if you wish to return it, please specify if there's other weasel problems and how neutrality is compromised. Bobanny 20:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And how bout Artistotle? He never wrote about vigilantes, sorry to say, because the concept didn't yet exist. The concept of "police" didn't exist until he invented it, so how could he be commenting on people who act "outside the law," when the "law," in the sense of that phrase, didn't exist? bobanny 21:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Needs Attention 

message: How about adding 'The A-Team' to the Television section?
Lisztian 02:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television 

message: Ok, I don't mean to be rude, but the insertion of a bizarre "psychoanalysis of vigilantism" right in the middle of the history section is completely insane and out of context... This takes the level of discussion down horribly... What does the discussion on knighthood, "legitimate" violence and monopoly on force have to do with alleged paraphilias? The grammar and style of the section is also unacceptably mediocre.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.10.1 (talk) 04:23, August 29, 2007 (UTC) 
:Agreed. I reverted it. Much of it was also original research not supported by the citations he or she provided, and frankly, not very helpful for this subject. bobanny 05:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some tags to the article because it's gone from bad to worse thanks to a persistent IP editor. Sources are woefully misused, quotations are stitched together, and overall, it's become an incoherent hodgepodge - or "stew" - of unrelated and peripherally related ideas that will only further confuse anyone looking here for clarification on this topic. Comments? bobanny 17:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Strange New Edits

message: OH my God, the article has been totally ruined and mutilated... The anthropological and philosophical context and background information, relating to monopoly of force, 'primitive' judicial punishment, etc., has been recklessly removed. The level of education is abysmal. The American Revolution is said to have occurred in the 19th century!!! No wonder no one trusts Wikipedia Is there anyone capable of cleaning up this uneducated, amateur mess and restoring the old good information and format?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.10.1 (talk) 08:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).   — 6etonyourfeet\t\c 11:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Insane Edits

message: From Presentism (literary and historical analysis): 
Presentism is a mode of historical analysis in which present-day ideas and perspectives are anachronistically introduced into depictions or interpretations of the past. Most modern historians seek to avoid presentism in their work because they believe it creates a distorted understanding of their subject matter.
And from Anachronism:
In academic writing, there is no place for deliberate anachronism, and here anachronism is regarded as an error of scholarly method. For example, we now know that the concept of Translatio imperii was first formulated in the 12th century. To use it to interpret 10th century literature, as early 20th century scholarship did, is anachronistic, an error which (once we see it) is obvious as such.
Note that the term "vigilantism" is only used twice in the book that is used to support the Robin Hood reference. Both are in the conclusion, written by the editor of the volume summarizing the main themes covered in the volume. The writer who actually analyses the Robin Hood ballads doesn't use the term - or any variation - at all. A book that uses a term in passing is hardly a reliable source for the subject that the term refers to, even if the writer is an egghead. 
Using Robin Hood in this article is like saying "Christianity existed long before the birth of Christ, because other people reportedly performed miraculous acts and preached to their followers." Or that elements of Nazism existed long before Hitler, which we know because many brutal and genocidal dictators have appeared throughout history. Antecedents only warrant inclusion if it helps to clarify the topic at hand, otherwise it just confuses it. A fundamental problem with this article has been that the term has been conflated with everything from (in the case of Robin Hood) outlawry, to rebels, renegades, and even pedophilia. The classic, neo-, and pseudo- distinctions are useful in this respect; note that those come from sources published by authors attempting to clarify the term as it's manifested historically, i.e., in the real-world political context in which vigilantism appears and from which it derives its meaning. bobanny 18:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Presentism

message: In doing a bit of research on the early history of Montana for other WP articles, the subject of Vigilantes arose.  When I reviewed this article, I was really dismayed at how poorly it convey's what the term meant (historical) and means today (contemporary interpretation).  Today Vigilante is really a slang term is most often viewed in a derogatory way.  Whereas, 150 years ago, vigilantes (as members of some sort of Vigilance Committee) were generally respected and tolerated by society.  I think attempting to define a single meaning for the term Vigilante is difficult and allows authors to bring in all sorts of irrelevant stuff that doesn't really contribute to the historical concept of Vigilante Committees, Vigilantism and members of those committees (Vigilantes).  I don't think that ignoring the Slang aspect of the term is necessary, but it should not be the main focus of the article.  WP would be useless if we attempted to defined and describe all aspects of any particular slang term.  I think merging Vigilante into Vigilance Committee will significantly improve WP content on these subjects.--Mike Cline (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion to Merge Vigilante into [[Vigilance Committee]]

message: I agree with the merge, but the other way round, the Vigilance committee merging into this article. This article is (or should be) about self-justice in general, as for the Vigilance committee article (despite existing, for sure, some cases all over the world), maybe it will be always more related to the USA. In last case, it can stay as an individual article, as a differentiation of the Vigilance committee (trade union). For now, i suggest the inclusion of an internal link in the ==See also== section to Vigilance committee.   
--Bluedenimtalk 19:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: The "Works of Fiction" section seems unnecessarily lengthy. 69.236.91.112 (talk) 23:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All the lists are much too lengthy, to the point of being ridiculous. Also, listing isolated instances of vigilante "justice" seems pointless - there are more than these, there is no context - what is the point? To say it has occurred in many cultures and is still happening?  To justify people who take the law into their own hands? --Parkwells (talk) 21:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insane Lists? 

message: "In recent times vigilante or vigilante justice has become a tool of some legislators respecting sex offenders [rightful or wrongful labeling]to terrorize anyone forced with the label of sex offender. Legislators speak of using baseball bats, penal islands, and the use of residency restrictions to run people out of towns, villages, cities, and states based on faulty information, which generally comes with vigilante reasoning."
What??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.201.11.2 (talk) 03:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Take a look at this:
* Reports have indicated that there is a Masked vigilante in Toronto Canada. He/she is reported to wear a skull mask and is being referred to as the Skull or The Reaper.
Does anyone know if there is any truth to this whatsoever? I was a little suspicious of it, due to the writing errors. Crosshairs-1 (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Could Someone Cite This?

message: If you read the page for the minuteman civil defense corps (NOT the "minuteman project", it says they do not break the law but rather work with authorities, thus they are not "vigilantes" as the term is described in the article  71.95.149.54 (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minuteman civil defense corps removed 

message: A vigilante is a person who violates the law in order to exact what they believe to be justice from criminals, because they think that the criminal will not be caught or will not be sufficiently punished by the legal system.
The KKK attacked Jews and Blacks for the sake of white supremacy. If you look at the KKK in this manner as vigilante, then you may as well add Al Queda to the list too. Come on, take the KKK off. Don't give them this kind of respect. --Panehesy (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it a crime to attempt to register to vote? BillMasen (talk) 13:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the KKK in here? 

message: http://www.surreynowleader.com/news/surrey-creep-catchers-continues-under-seige/
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/lawsuit-against-surrey-creep-catchers-alleges-defamation-threats-1.3351161
http://www.news1130.com/2017/04/02/two-lawsuits-head-surrey-creep-catchers-head/
http://bc.ctvnews.ca/innocent-man-dubbed-a-pedo-by-creep-catchers-lawsuit-claims-1.3328551
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/another-defamation-suit-filed-against-president-of-surrey-creep-catchers
According to the suits Ryan Laforge and Surrey Creep Catchers have been named for defamation and various civil rights violations in the allegations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.130.165 (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Creep Catchers named as a 21st Vigilante according to the Lawsuit

message: This poorly written article cites in its 21 century section that "Alejo Garza Tamez a 77 year old Mexican hunter and businessman from the state of Nuevo León, Mexico, killed four and wounded two other members of the organized crime band Los Zetas, when they tried to take away his ranch from him. He is considered as a folk hero in Mexico.[28]"  But this case is clearly NOT a vigilantism case at all: This person clearly requested help and protection from the authorities before he was attacked by the organized criminals.  He lkived with his family in his own property (his ranch), when he received treats from the Los Zetas drug cartel, pretending him to pay for his life and property, He rejected the treats and prepared himself, sending his family to other safer place and gathering his legally owned firearms, then he waited for the criminals and died in the attack when the criminals invaded his home and ranch, but taking the life of several of them before dying. Portraiting him as a "vigilante2 is completely wrong.  It is a case of Self-Defense when a group of criminals trespassed his property and shoot at him.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 16:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I took out this example for the reason given above. JudahH (talk) 08:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Alejo Garza Tamez was NOT a vigilante at all]]

message: Why is the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society not valid for modern-day examples of vigilante organizations? While they are not "hard" vigilantes (their personal enforcement is "soft"--i.e. stink-bombs, etc.), nevertheless their ideology and tactics are definitely vigilante.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.148.212 (talk) 23:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you, however I believe the original complaint was that there was no source calling them vigilantes. I'm sure there must be plenty out there tho, find one and you can add it. Ryan4314  (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's the source . It is a collection of press reports (a lot of them using the "vigilante" word) hosted on the actual Sea Shephard website. Ryan4314  (talk) 15:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Re-added. Ryan4314  (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Sea Shepherd Conservation Society]]

message: I reverted the ip edit which took away the "unlawful" description. Unlawful may be an uncomfortable word, but I'm just trying to save us all from the pomo cognitive mush in which we are all slowly drowning :).
I suppose we could change it to "illegal", but does that really change anything? BillMasen (talk) 12:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Unlawful

message: i changed the following "unlawful" into unjust (as shown with the >> and << characters below)
"A vigilante is someone who unlawfully punishes a criminal, or participates in a mob or conspiracy to mete out >>unlawful<< punishment to a criminal or criminals."
this is because vigilantes act on what they think is unjust, not necessarily on what the government thinks is unjust.
but this change was reverted, i'd like an explanation please.85.144.133.46 (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because "illegal" is correct.  Anything else is just a particular POV on that government's laws.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: vigilantes act on what they or their group think is unjust, not on what the government thinks is unjust, "unlawful" or "illegal". the vigilante's opinion may or may not be related to the governments opinion of the act, hence "unjust" instead of unlawful or illegal, which are by definition restricted to the opinion of the government or another group, not necessarily including the vigilante.85.144.133.46 (talk) 22:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still "illegal". I think fuel duty is unjust. If I don't pay it, then I maybe I'm a vigilante - but it's still "illegal"  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  unlawful 2 

message: Vigilantism is interwoven with enigmatic ethical ambiguity, so just plain out calling the phenomena "unlawful" (with connotations of ethical evil) is reductionistic... The term "extralega" is best, as it makes no moralistic commentary either on behalf of the putative government (and its putative monopoly over punishment) or in the vigilante's direction...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.52.186.148 (talk) 20:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Unlawful" is incorrect as a blanket statement.  I agree with the OP.  BriEnBest (talk) 10:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Extralegal is Best

message: Why are the Provisional IRA on this list? It was my understanding that they only cleared out criminality in areas they controlled so that they could profit from illicit activity. They also collected "Revolutionary tax" or, as normal citizens refer to it, "protection money". Not to mention the sectarian violence and random car-bombings they committed. Hardly a "Vigilante group".--Crimzon2283 (talk) 19:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Provisional IRA

message: Ones where the police publicly and openly cooperate with the protagonist should not count. In that case, that would make the person an "instrument or agent" of the government.  
I refer you to United States vs. Jarrett (2003) which dealt with the matter of private individuals acting as "instruments or agents" of the government, and how that does not exempt them from refraining from unreasonable search and seizure.
So, in the 1994 film version of The Shadow, he acted as a vigilante, since the police did not openly support him (in fact, the police commissioner at one point says that he will appoint a task force to stop the Shadow from interfering in police affairs).  
Also, one has problems defining what counts as part of the genre; do Harry Potter, Luke Skywalker, Tarzan, and so forth count as part of the genre? 
01:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Most of the movies based on superheroes could be considered as vigilante fiction-perhaps, perhaps not

message: Saturday 28th March 2009
The retired banking boss Sir Fred Goodwin whose windows were smashed and car vandalised this week as a reprisal for his gargantuan and unearned pension payout should count himself lucky for had he been living in this part of the country 100 years ago then the consequences would have been far more severe. Instead of a foray lasting a few minutes by angry anti-capitalist protestors outside his Edinburgh home, he would have found himself at the mercy of the mob for several days, anxious to vent their wrath by what was known as ran-tanning, a particularly nasty form of social punishment prevalent in the South Lincolnshire fens until the early years of the last century.
Ran-tanning was a notorious method of expressing public indignation whenever someone transgressed the bounds of what was perceived to be good behaviour but as with all illegal gatherings the definition was usually confined to that laid down by the ringleaders and often closely resembled a riot. If a person had committed some act of which the other villagers disapproved, they would congregate near their house carrying an effigy of the persons who had incurred their displeasure and making a terrible commotion by beating with sticks, tins, cans, pots, pans, buckets and kettles, playing mouth organs, booing, shouting and singing and on occasions lighting bonfires. The demonstrations were carried on for a number of nights in succession, usually three, after which the effigy would be burned.
This was a form of vigilantism likely to provoke social disorder, doled out to anyone who breached the local code of what was right and what was wrong and was particularly likely in the case of sexual misdemeanours such as adultery and domestic incidents such as wife beating. In fact, cases became so frequent and so serious during the late 19th century that they eventually attracted the attention of the authorities and ran-tanning was banned under the Highways Act of 1882. Yet cases persisted. Illicit sexual liaisons were particularly prevalent in this country during the Great War of 1914-18 when husbands had either volunteered or been conscripted into the army to fight in the trenches of Flanders and France leaving wives behind who were vulnerable to temptation although always wary of what the neighbours might say.
Not all of the soldiers were sent home immediately after the Armistice and by the following summer, hundreds had still not been reunited with their loved ones and in 1919, a case came before the magistrates at the town hall in Bourne when it was alleged that a woman and her lover had been ran-tanned by a group of men at Rippingale on August 29th on the grounds that she had been carrying on with a sergeant-major on leave while her husband was still away from home serving with the army.
Eight men were summoned to appear for unlawfully joining in a brawl and the case created so much interest that the courtroom was crowded with villagers for the entire two-hour hearing when the police described how they had been called out to quell a riot in which a crowd of men were causing pandemonium outside a house by beating drums, tins, buckets, plough shares, old pieces of iron and playing instruments, shouting and yelling, later gathering in a nearby field where two effigies were burned. The disturbances continued for three nights by which time the entire village was in a state of commotion and the noise could be heard two miles away but the men refused to stop despite warnings that they were guilty of disorderly conduct.
Solicitor Cecil Crust, who appeared for the defendants, argued that the men were not guilty of a brawl and quoted the dictionary definition as “a noisy quarrel” and whilst he admitted that there had been some noise, insisted that the men were not quarrelling. His argument was overruled by the magistrates and Superintendent Herbert Bailey, head of the Bourne police, told the bench: “The conduct of these men was disgraceful and it is abominable that people should be subjected to such rowdyism.” After some discussion, the magistrates agreed to the charges being withdrawn provided the defendants expressed regret for their actions and undertook not to repeat such incidents under any circumstances in the future although they were ordered to pay costs.
Ran-tanning was by then dying out and the last recorded case in these parts was at Quadring Fen, near Spalding on 15th February 1928 when the victim was a woman alleged to have made remarks scandalising her neighbours. Police intervened and 23 people were charged with disorderly conduct when the court was told that ran-tanning was perhaps the only survival of mob law which existed in this country. All of the defendants were fined between five and ten shillings and ordered to pay costs and there have been no further cases of this nature since.
Perhaps the case of Fred the Shred has provoked a return to this old but effective method of castigation because we hear that banking fat cats in London have been warned to be on their guard during the G20 summit next week in case of revenge attacks by militants for the collapse of the financial system. We wonder if ran-tanning is likely to spread to the capital and if this is why the police are being issued with dozens more taser guns.
I guess that is a form of vigilantism banned and actually recorded in court records - 
http://homepages.which.net/~rex/bourne/diary200903.htm
is original ref - someone can add it in  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.96.60 (talk) 17:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ran Tanning

message: Vigilante groups have been organized in the city: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vigilantes-join-16000-police-on-capitals-streets-2334910.html --Bentaguayre (talk) 10:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: London 2011

message: Haning read the above comment on "A vigilante is a person who violates the law...,", I see that my entry for 1954 Thailand Village Scouts does not belong here, nor should Their 21st century Internet censorship vigilance groups are called ... cyber scouts.... be moved to 21st century section. However, Both China and Thailand do have internet vigilance groups that seem to cross the line into being internet vigilantes advocating violence. That violates Thai law, but only victims get prosecuted. I'm asking more experience editors to recommend where this should go. One such Thai vigilance group maintains a Thai-based Facebook group at th-th.facebook.com called in English Social Sanctions (SS). Following the Thai general election, 2011, the new Minister for Communication and Technology (MICT) Captain Anudith Nakornthap of the Pheu Thai Party went on record declaring:
  
--Pawyilee (talk) 04:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet Vigilante  

message: Seems he should be added to 21st century vigilantes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.152.67.38 (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Zimmerman 

message: Not from italian. Italian language influence over American English in the XIX century was almost inexistant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.231.186.130 (talk) 20:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vigilante comes from spanish 

message: I just read the article for the first time today.  And noticed that it was horrible.  I reverted it.  You can look at the last revision.  It starts out "It is my own personal experience that the vigilante..." and goes on to become even stranger and even less encyclopedia-an.  After reading through the talk page a bit, it seems like these strange opinionated edits have been happening for some time.  I'm a bit new, and the editor doesn't have a profile or was not logged in.  I think the opinionated-ness of the edits warrant some kind of preventative action.  BriEnBest (talk) 10:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've noticed that too.  This article does seems to attract a lot of unsourced POV.  The topic is very powerful.  Fortunately, a lot of editors seem to be watching the revisions, but it may be time to lock the page.  Richard Apple (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  It looks like someone has been continuously making POV (to put it gently) edits for a long time 

message: I see there was some dispute about what the precise dictionary definition is. I shortened it but here it is in full: a self appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.
I think that what is up there now is an adequate and succinct summary of that. This is the 2005 edition of the OED so it might be different now. Risingrain (talk)... Why it matters 13:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: exact dictionary definition

message: I`m no a mormon, but his death by a lynching mob was a great new in U.S.A.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.207.187.233 (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of Joseph Smith 

message: Anyone with the relevant citations feel like tying this back into the original vigilantes of the Roman world? 62.196.17.197 (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the Word 

message: :moved down from top where it had been inserted
The whole basis of this article is HIGHLY partisan and not a NPOV.  I don't have time right now to change it or revert some of the changes that have been made.  It sounded like there was some interesting, useful stuff about definitions and history, that would have added complexity to this article.  
Why do I state this?  
Well, the whole definition, upon which much of the article and edits are based, is factually wrong.  
That first sentence which defines vigilante, according to the OED (without page number) is a FICTIONAL REFERENCE.  The OED in fact says:
"A member of a vigilance committee" and "A night-watchman", with "vigiˈlantism n. (orig. U.S.) the principles or activities of vigilantes or vigilance committees."
!!!
"...the nationwide group known as the "Rain City Superhero Movement"..."
The RCSM is not a "nationwide group". It solely consists of members located within and operating within Seattle, Washington. It is commonly known in the Real Life Super Heroes community that Phoenix Jones and his RCSM team are notorious for self-promotion online with extensive internet marketing and advertising to the local Seattle news agencies, as indicated within http://www.reallifesuperheroes.org/. The inclusion of his group of ten members (as opposed to the RLSH, which has hundreds of members nationwide and around the globe) within this Wikipedia topic looks like spam from one of the internet marketing people on his team.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.202.40 (talk) 07:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 2011 comment on partisan- and NPOV-ness

message: :moved down from top where it had been inserted
Much of this article is false. A vigilante arrests and or punishes or harms people illegally. A neighborhood watch person or paid or volunteer security guard patrols, observes and reports to police and can make citizens arrests as can ANY citizen. Making a citizens arrest is not a vigilante action. Guardian angels are a neighborhood watch volunteer security guard organization. So are real life super heroes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C07A:25C0:D162:19B4:A525:D495 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: 2015 comment "Much of this article is false"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Vigilante. 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:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160306133837/http://tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2009/feb/15/inla-claims-responsibility-for-murder-of-derry-dru to http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2009/feb/15/inla-claims-responsibility-for-murder-of-derry-dru/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070928140913/http://www.accord.org.za/ct/2000-1/CT%201_2000%20pg25-29.pdf to http://www.accord.org.za/ct/2000-1/CT%201_2000%20pg25-29.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070820111032/http://faculty.ncwc.edu:80/TOCONNOR/300/300lect10.htm to http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/300/300lect10.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:42, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Vigilante. 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:
*Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Hx3nP0qAcSwJ:www.sfhistoryencyclopedia.com/articles/f/fallonMalachi.html+vigilante+committee+discredit+opponent&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us with https://web.archive.org/web/20070928104700/http://www.sfhistoryencyclopedia.com/articles/f/fallonMalachi.html on http://www.sfhistoryencyclopedia.com/articles/f/fallonMalachi.html
*Added  tag to http://www.herald.ie/national-news/cira-blamed-for-attack-on-man-20-2581482.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014170148/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3757/is_200609/ai_n18621794 to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3757/is_200609/ai_n18621794
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014170153/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20060625/ai_n16504954 to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20060625/ai_n16504954
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) 18:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Vigilante. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070203104624/http://www.csvr.org.za/papers/papvtp1.htm to http://www.csvr.org.za/papers/papvtp1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030919122431/http://www.wcl.american.edu/journal/lawrev/47/pdf/hine.pdf to http://www.wcl.american.edu/journal/lawrev/47/pdf/hine.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090416012509/http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_the_news/White_Supremacy/arizona_vigilantes_40705.htm to http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_the_news/White_Supremacy/arizona_vigilantes_40705.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080710052604/http://borderstories.org/index.php/campo-high-pointer.html to http://borderstories.org/index.php/campo-high-pointer.html
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) 22:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: — Assignment last updated by Jmwhitfi23 (talk) 13:05, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: SSC199 TY2

message: The article mentions many precursors and parallels to what is typically referred to as vigilantism, and has a long list of examples. I'm surprised that organized crime organizations like the Sicilian Mafia are not mentioned. (I suppose some of the examples mentioned could be categorized as organized crime organizations, but then that is not made explicit in the article.) I suppose it is not only in movies that such organizations may violently maintain a form of extralegal justice or order, both internally, punishing members for various alleged transgressions, and externally, punishing transgressions allegedly committed against members of the community in which the organization exists, or against "clients" paying protecion@ money. (Actually, early in the lead to the article Protection racket there is this link "... protection outside the sanction of the law ..." to the present article.) Of course, a valid source would have to be found. Nø (talk) 09:26, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mafia 

message: The article mentions a few examples of modern vigilantes who dress up or otherwise identify as superheroes. It's easy to understand why that comes to happen since several well-known superhero characters operate as vigilantes in their fictitious universes. I think it would be natural if this fact was stated more clearly - maybe in a brief section on "Vigilantism in fiction". Of course, proper sources would be needed. Nø (talk) 09:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superheroes