Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law Enforcement/Archive 6

message: We have reached 50 members, congrats to all. The newest member has a couple of concerns regarding the inclusion of a forensics agency in the project, as he/she is worried that it suggests they are affiliated with a law enforcement agency. I tried to explain that inclusion in the project means that the topic is related to law enforcement by content, not neccessarily that the subject is closely linked to specific law enforcement agencies, but I'm not sure how clear I was! I suspect he/she will post here soon SGGH speak! 10:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I delisted the article after having another look a the scope. Congrats for the 50 members though! SGGH speak! 11:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe one day soon! But for now lets get this project finished, only Serbia left to do now, plus the sub-regions and dependencies and so on. I will have a look today... SGGH speak! 14:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Archived. Good job all with the Law Enforcement in Europe drive. I think Dep had an article he wanted people to look at after that? Something about equipment? SGGH speak! 12:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Participants 

message: There is no value in adding this category to articles about specific law enforcement agencies. It should only be added to articles about generic law enforcement in specific countries, which was what it was originally used and intended for. Adding it to agency articles duplicates the country categories and will not tell a reader browsing the cats anything at all, since the articles are not being categorised "by country" (e.g. Militsiya is not law enforcement by country - which country?; Law enforcement in Serbia is law enforcement by country as the title implies; this is the usual useage of "Foo by country" categories). Since agencies will already appear under the appropriate "Law enfocement in Foo" category, which will itself be a subcat of "Law enforcement by country", they do not need to appear in the supercat too. Frankly, I think the supercat should only be for subcats in the first place. not individual articles, which are better off under the more specific category. -- Necrothesp 19:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Argh, please dont tell me i have to go and remove them all =[. I wish someone told me before i did it. Anyway no harm done, i have learn't a lesson Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  19:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I did it too :( oh wells SGGH speak! 10:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, have the moves been undone and the user messaged? SGGH speak! 23:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Law enforcement by country]]

message: Maybe we can fill this one out after the duty belt FORWARD?  Robbskey 23:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, you can manage that forward if you like Robbskey? Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  14:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really?  Well heck, if you think so.  Robbskey 16:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Law enforcement in Saint Lucia and Law enforcement in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines started.  I can make some headway on these while the ones who really know about police belts hammer that one out.  Robbskey 18:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Righty oh! =] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  18:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kintetsubuffalo has been doing a lot of work on this.  Maybe I should make an award.  Robbskey 15:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could use one of our awards on the Templates and awards subpage. Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  15:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, good idea.  Robbskey 15:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: North America

message: The article Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police was speedily deleted after I had added two references about the arrest of a celebrity by airport police. Perhaps someone with more access to information about southern California might consider recreating and expanding the article. --Eastmain 14:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What sources did you use? SGGH speak! 14:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I found Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police which should be all you need to get it kept on wikipedia (though we will want to expand on that of course) I don't see why it shouldn't be re-created, but I have messaged the deleting admin just to check there wasn't some other reason :) SGGH speak! 14:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though to be fair it does only have 34 officers I can see why it might not seem notable. SGGH speak! 14:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, i dont think that would meet WP:N, although i would liked to be proven wrong! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  16:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a fun fact, Andorra only has 50 police officers.  Hey, researching for those articles had some hidden benefits!  Robbskey 16:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: DYK it when you create the article! SGGH speak! 20:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if it should be perhaps merged into Bob Hope Airport? SGGH speak! 11:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would personally keep it as a separate article. I have no problem with law enforcement agencies, even small ones, having their own articles. However, it's possible an AfD may disagree with me! -- Necrothesp 12:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Police]] 

message: There is a new shortcut for this talk page, it is WT:LE
The main project page is still WP:LE
This will hopely make it easier to direct people to our talk page!
Regards
Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check SGGH speak! 20:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check mate Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: King me!  Robbskey 20:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: D SGGH speak! 20:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Shortcut 

message: The 1919 Boston Police Strike finally has its own article! SGGH speak! 21:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooohhh...nicely done. bobanny 04:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All is quiet on the WP:LE front... SGGH speak! 20:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: mmm yea, ^^^^ good article! =] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: American Polygraph Association created.  Should all articles created from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Law Enforcement/Requested articles page be tagged with the  tag?  Robbskey 21:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: No, not all the articles there were added by people who know the scope, so give the scope a once over before you tag :) SGGH speak! 21:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok good, thanks, that clears that up.  I didn't think that seemed like law enforcement type material.  Robbskey 22:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Boston Police Strike]] 

message: I have added this article to the watchlist-it's been getting all sorts of spam and crap thrown into it because of the Paris Hilton thing. Please watch. Chris 22:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I semi protected it for you to tide it over until the paris hilton thing calms down SGGH speak! 23:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, ill be keeping an eye on that article, even though its protected! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Lee Baca]]

message: I've suggested these two pages (Special police & Special police force) be merged.  Both are small pages of lower quality which are comprised mostly of lists; both describing the same thing. akuyumeTC 02:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep merge them =] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  15:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Has been done by the looks of it SGGH speak! 11:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special police and Special police force 

message: ...has no image of a UK police officer. I can't get a uniform for at least a week or two but there must be other UK officers out there who have a camera and could create a suitable image? SGGH speak! 11:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I just woke up and I was glancing around for picture ideas and saw this website listed as the official website on the Metropolitan Police Service page, did it get hacked or somethin?  Robbskey 12:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Nevermind, here's the actual website.  Better fix that.  Robbskey 12:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Law enforcement in the United Kingdom]] 

message: Just realised I've been "leading" this project for 6 months now since I found it, does anyone want to swap leaders or anything? It's not too difficult a job as it has excellent supporting users, but it might avoid a wikatorship... SGGH speak! 20:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, you've been a great leader and you should continue to do so! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mmm, I don't know, if history teaches us anything, it's that no leader should serve indefinitely.  (Read: I agree with Dep.)  Robbskey 22:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahh yes, hindsight is a wonderful thing! =] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  12:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Well if anyone wants a crack at it let me know :) SGGH speak! 20:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Ahh, go on then, we only live once! You dont mind SGGH? Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  22:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't, no. Let's leave it a couple of days to see if anyone else says something shall we? If not, how about changing over 00.01 tuesday morning, GMT? I.E. On Tuesday you'll be head... whatever it's called... coordinator? How's that sound? SGGH speak! 23:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep sounds good too me =] Anyone want to veto this? Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  23:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, I'm a little uneasy about this.  (Sorry, I just haven't had many opportunities to be sarcastic lately)  Robbskey 00:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  6 months 

message: This template:
Is surely redundant considering the work we are doing above, I vote we delete it, remove it from the pages on which it currently resides and replace it with the relevan regional template from the above collection. Please see its old AFD. Note, if we agree here I think we still have to take it for AfD, but due to its complete redundancy it will surely be deleted. Discuss below:
*Support as nominator. SGGH speak! 15:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please copy your concensus over to Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 18 SGGH speak! 17:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policing by country 

message: Another editor has created the article Republika Srpska Police, which may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --Eastmain 21:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers, I have rated it. SGGH speak! 23:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Republika Srpska Police]] 

message: Dep the above category is chocka! SGGH speak! 14:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll sort it ;] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  14:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cleared! =] Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI: I've just noticed that someone moved the project banner from  to ! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  18:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Who the hell did that without any concencus or discussion?! That kind of thing needs to be discussed before it happens, or at least mentioned! Fortunatly, after a check, I see that the tags with the old template haven't broken or anything. I would suggest Dep, that you might want to find out who moved it and let them know they need to discuss things like that here with the project. WP:BOLD doesn't really applying to changing project organisation and admin.... SGGH speak! 18:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh yeah, and good job with the assessing, I notice the nifty navigation box too! Also I see we have our first Featured Article, Texas Ranger Division! SGGH speak! 19:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was User:Kintetsubuffalo confirmed here. i was a bit shocked aswell, that no-one mentioned it or said anything. Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  19:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: It's your call boss :) SGGH speak! 19:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Warned: User talk:Kintetsubuffalo#Law Enforcement template moved. Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  19:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Unassessed Law enforcement articles]]

message: Hey, I wrote a new Internal Troops of Ukraine article today and requested it to be grammar-checked as I'm no native English-user. But I'd like to have it checked by editors familiar with law enforcement first. The same is about significant expansion of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine (wonder did I leave a grammar template there?). Thanks in advance guys,AlexPU 18:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wondering, should the first one not be "Interior troops of the Ukraine"? Take a look at the English external link at the end and decide :) SGGH speak! 19:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe a name change is in order! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  20:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually meant to suggest "Internal troops of the Ukraine" not interior, I'm just an idiot :) I'm okay with what it is now I guess, if it is what the official title is and not just a literal word for word translation of the Russian title, which can cause confusion. Good articles though, your english was good! SGGH speak! 10:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh and my reason for moving the other article to "Ministry of Internal Affairs (Ukraine)" was that other articles about such organisation in other countries are called Ministry of Internal Affairs (Germany) or (Japan) or whatever, so it's good to set a standard across all articles :) SGGH speak! 10:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting LE-specialist grammar check 

message: Waiting for assessment from someone other than me, *clap clap* wake up people :) SGGH speak! 16:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rated article as: "Start" Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  16:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ten minutes...not a bad response time. bobanny 16:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a new record! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  16:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just like a real-life Nicholas Angel! bobanny 17:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 3 minutes for me, does that count? Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  17:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Law enforcement in Cuba]] 

message: Does anyone fancy writing a lead for this article? Greatly appreciated! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I threw one together. SGGH speak! 19:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appreciated =D! Thats a good lead actually! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  19:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Uniforms and equipment of the British police]] 

message: What do you reckon about turning that into a table and adding the call signs, as well as expanding it in general? I can get a hold of most of them, Sussex is Hotel 900, it's not operational information so its fine to put up. SGGH speak! 19:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That article is terrible, it does need a turn around! Lets GO! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  19:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Got most of the call signs Dep, a.k.a Oscar Romeo 11 sorry, India 99! SGGH speak! 21:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh incidentally half the uk police constabularies have "____police" as their title and need to be "____ constabulary" don't they? SGGH speak! 21:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea. e.g. Cheshire Police when it is really called Cheshire Constabulary Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  15:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Lets get moving then! SGGH speak! 15:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Opps, actually if you look here it seems not all of them are cosntabulary, I didn't know that. SGGH speak! 15:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bedfordshire Police is not a constabulary see this image: :Image:Bedfordshirepolice.gif Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  15:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Likewise with Dorset: :Image:Dorsetpolicecrest.gif & Nottinghamshire: :Image:Nottspolice.jpg Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  15:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Checked =D all seem alright now! Dep. Garcia  ( Talk  + | Help Desk | Complaints )  18:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Police Aviation in United Kingdom]] 

message: (You'll have to excuse me for being a formatting freak).  I was looking for infoboxes for police department webpages, and I found two:  Template:Infobox_Police and Template:Infobox_Police_Department.  Think these could be merged if we had auto include/exclude parameters like some of the newer infoboxes have (see template:infobox television for a good one).  Also, a field where we can put a picture of the shoulder patch or logo would be nice.  Before I make any changes, if you guys wouldn't mind helping me make a list of categories or information that should be shown on every department page. DLPanther 20:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The current fields (for both) are:  name, logo, motto, country, established, jurisdiction, sworn, non-sworn, CSO, stations, jails, helicopters, police boats, chief, sheriff, superintendent, commissioner(s), URL.  If we're naming helicopters and police boats, I think other units should be represented as well, like K-9, SWAT, Analyst/Detective, dispatch etc.  It may be easier just to have a "special departments" fill in field.  Also, there definately needs to be a usage description at the bottom of the template page, because entries like "jurisdiction" are vague and could be filled out any number of ways. DLPanther 20:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One point that springs to mind is that it should be flexible enough to use on national police forces, or in articles on sub-national forces, like the constabularies in Britain or state by state in the US, as I believe these would have different parametres (the difference between police and police_department infoboxes above shows what I mean) SGGH speak! 21:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Police and Police Department Infoboxes 

message: Hey all, Dep is taking a bit of a break from wikipedia due to work related business, and I'm back as "lead coordinator" and I think it's been far too quiet here! :D Let's get another project going shall we? Galvanise things into action again! Give me your suggestions! SGGH speak! 21:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note, Mark Felt wasn't listed as being in this project! Make sure relevant articles are included please guys and girls :) SGGH speak! 16:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm back! 

message: Hi all, just a quick question that has come up at Police car.  Does anyone in the US know of any police departments who operate separate vehicles for patrol, response and traffic duty?  This is common practice in Europe and some other parts of the world, but seemingly not that common in the US.
Does anyone have an example from the US we could reference?
Thanks in advance Owain.davies 19:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a semi-related point, which may be what is the case in the US, it is not just vehicles that may vary, but also officers who operate mainly on patrol (if they are not response driving trained) or traffic etc. Perhaps the US has role specific officers more than cars? And when a patrolling officer gets into a car, it is a patrol car, and when a response trained officer doing a response shift is in it, its a response car? SGGH speak! 22:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought that in the US, the one basic driving course they get at police academy or whatever covers everything.  So, there are no graded driving systems like in the UK, everyone over there is a response/pursuit driver when they leave the academy, is how I understood it.  Also I don't think they split policing into seperate areas or departments such as response, general patrol and traffic as much as we do, I think it's just a case of one big team of uniformed officers at each precint who deal with everything, and then there's the likes of detectives and other more specialised departments such as SWAT etc.  But not response/patrol/traffic in terms of categorising the uniformed officers as far as I'm aware?  I'n not American though so I can easily stand corrected! Liverpool Scouse 23:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not in the US either, but apparently a bit closer than you folks. There's a good chance it's not standardized in the US, since policing is locally controlled. I checked Seattle's website, and they have these funny little parking enforcement cars for parking tickets and special event traffic control, but there's no indication on the traffic section page of any special vehicles for that. My guess is not. In Vancouver, where I am and which is closer to the US on such things, there's no special vehicles for traffic, although I believe police motorcycle patrols are used for traffic than other duties. bobanny 00:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It is regionalized in the US as to what kinds of vehicles are used, when they are used, and whether it is a special response vehicle or not.  Here in California, traffic patrol is generally done with motorcycles, where general duty patrol and response is done in police cars.  Some agencies like the Highway Patrol have 'chase cars' which are just speedier versions of the general cars.  Some places like Philadelphia have large vans with handcuff anchors in the back they use during events like Mardi Gras.  SWAT teams sometimes have armored personnel cars with gun ports, etc. for high risk situations.  The little parking vehicles are usually driven by non-sworn personnel specifically assigned to that duty, among other tasks that do not requrie arrest powers.  The level of compartmentalization of the officers and the variety of equipment is mostly based on the size of the department and the community they serve (in other words, funding).  My local PD has a pretty good article about it here DLPanther 04:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting comment, what about categorisation of drivers though?  Does one standard course cover all kinds of driving (excluding larger vehicles obviously) - i.e. are there separate courses for pursuit drivers? Liverpool Scouse 13:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Specialized vehicles like motorcycles and vans would be separate training, but basic pursuit techniques are taught in the academy to all officers along with the other emergency vehicle operations like driving in inclement weather, proper driving while using lights and sirens, and things like backing and tight quarters driving.  Usually it's just the first person to start the pursuit is the lead unit.  The political climate right now is not friendly to pursuits so most agencies have policies against pursuing non-violent offenders. Generally, it is used very little, except on the highways.  Those highway cops will chase you till the ends of the earth, and they do regular training in vehicle operations so they tend to be better at it. DLPanther 15:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There are of course public order vans in the UK, just a transit van full of officers with a riot shield over the windscreen and a cage or two in the back. SGGH speak! 01:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about US police cars 

message: This was raised a long time ago when we only had about 10 members, now we have over 65 (ish) and was wondering what people though of it as a possibility in the future? SGGH speak! 00:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  News letter 

message: the combat police section of Law enforcement in South Korea seems to violate POV (and, perhaps less importantly, not as well written as could be). nothing wrong with describing tactics and training but to minimize police brutality charges seems disingenuous. some videos unflattering to the combat police were also removed:
*http://media1.liveleak.com/2005/Aug/17/LiveLeak-dot-com-821-police_brutality_in_korea.wmv (Viral Video)
*http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1896336681061668836&q=korea+police&hl=en (Full video, including the viral video excert)
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKJyR_JFOKs (Personal video, mostly riot images)
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuGIplPRvM4 Daechuri riot. (Part one of four, rest are in “more from this user” section of the video)
skimming through article history shows there are two somewhat fleshed out versions of that section: one anti-combat police and the other pro. south korean riots seem pretty intense. i assume violence are committed by both sides. that section ought to be looked at and probably rewritten by someone neutral and knowledgable. Mct mht 09:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if google videos make the best evidence without written sources to back up, I'll search for some news articles about examples of any occurences of police brutality. SGGH speak! 13:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added to that section, including information about brutality accusations and deaths and the hands of the police, but also information about the number of injuries that result to the police force themselves, in an attempt to find a balance. Also, the rest of the references need fixing rather than just leaving them as blue links. SGGH speak! 13:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for your prompt response and attention! Mct mht 13:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  south korean combat police  

message: Thanks for the work you did on the duty belt article, which was linked from Police officer.
I'd also appreicate you passing on thanks to the other users who have worked on it :) ShakespeareFan00 23:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks 

message: I've begun going through the B-class articles and have lowered a lot of them to "start" class, and I cleared out the unassessed articles. I just wanted to mention that we have very few articles classed in the higher end of the quality scale and just wanted to further encourage focusing efforts on quality. The tendency of this project has been quantity: there's around a thousand stub-class articles versus 10 that are GA and higher in the projects scope. This isn't meant as a criticism, and is natural way for things to evolve, but perhaps the project should begin shifting gears in this respect.
That said, I think the collaborations are a great idea in this direction. Good work on the duty belt; I never would've guessed so much could be said about a belt!
Also, I don't think it's a crime to rate an article you created or made major contributions to if it's start-class or a stub. For the sake of expediency, if it has the main elements of an article (references, proper formating, photo, sub-headings, etc), but still falls far short of a complete article, just tag it start. If it's less than that, it's a stub. An objective value-judgment isn't really required below B-class, IMO, and we can prevent the unassessed list from building up. cheers, bobanny 20:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with you on all counts. The project is so young that we went out and grabbed every article we needed in the scope. I think fortnightly collaborations would be a good idea. We do need more than the one FA (Deep throat, whose real name escapes me at the moment). I'll set up a collaboration of the fortnight page. SGGH speak! 23:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessments

message: As per the above point, I have created a collaboration page. Check it out and make sure to read all the instructions. I'm hoping it can run a specific way. Find the link on the main navigation page. SGGH speak! 23:23, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd love to see one of the big influential police departments make it up to featured. Most of them are already extensive and a blitz collaboration might attract editors from outside the project, such as the MET, the RCMP, NYPD, or the FBI. Mind you, these ones can also be contentious. Anyone else? bobanny 03:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good plan, but (as I'm sure you have realised) make sure you only have one in mind when you make a suggestion. :) SGGH speak! 14:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Collaboration

message: Incidentally, every article on the above template that isn't about a person must have a  tag on its talk page. If someone could help me out with this it would be appreciated, just remember that the WPLE tag goes underneath the FBI one SGGH speak! 15:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh no wait, including people too, because they are notable law enforcement officers. Never mind though, I'm almost done. SGGH speak! 15:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Template:FBI]]

message: Hi all.  Am I right in assuming this name change was done at the behest of this WikiProject?  If so I invite you to contribute to the current discussion about changing the name back to Policing in the United Kingdom. (And if not, you're still invited to participate). -- SiobhanHansa 19:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting [[Law enforcement in the United Kingdom]] name change 

message: I am from WikiProject Cincinnati, and am requesting here and on the requested articles page an article on the Cincinnati Police Department. Being that I live near the city and that the department has seen many controversies, I don't feel comfortable writing it. I was hoping an inspired editor from this project might consider creating the article. Thanks. (Mind meal 02:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I might get time to whip up a stub or start-class article within the next few days. It might be more expedient for you to begin it though, since you're more aware of what the most notable issues are, and for outsiders to POV-check it. I did a quick google search and saw racial profiling, segways, and something about a consent decree, presumably to do with race relations. Any other biggies? bobanny 03:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

text: There is also a history of police brutality and controversial shootings, which had the residual effect of spawning the 2001 Cincinnati riots. Please see :Category:Police-community relations in Cincinnati as a brief indicator of what we are talking about (the category only scratches the surface). There are many, many other incidents like these available. Most of them are only covered by local press, ie. the Cincinnati Enquirer and sometimes the Cincinnati Post. The post seems more reluctant to address the issue. Issues concerning police treatment of African-Americans in the city has a history that goes way, way back to Civil War days (when the force was mostly Irish). In Cincinnati, police relations with the black population are extremely tense. I personally don't want to take the issue too far, but I also don't want to give a pollyanish view of Cincinnati. The history is comparable to that of the LA Police Department. If you would be willing to create the article, that would be wonderful. There is a lot there if a person digs enough, but I personally just don't feel comfortable starting it. (Mind meal 01:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it would be helpful if you contributed Mind meal, you seem to know a lot about it. Users at this project can contribute alongside and check for POV, and by creating it now you also invite other users who come across it to help out too! :) SGGH speak! 20:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cincinnati Police Department

message: Hello all, I'm new to this WikiProject and to Wikipedia itself. I've created a page about the New Jersey Transit Police Department and I was wondering if I could get a peer review from the people in this project. I would greatly appreciate comments and constructive criticism. Seeing how this is my first artice I still have quite a bit to learn!
(Rebel3986 03:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Jersey Transit Police Department