Talk:Warminster Township, Pennsylvania

message: Warminster's police misconduct, particularly amongst its chiefs, is a significant part of the town's history. As such, it belongs in the article. It is up to the naysayers to prove otherwise, not to me to include it. Just because two editors with an agenda disagree is not justification for deleting it, as per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not > Wikipedia is not a democracy, and Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion.--PhiladelphiaInjustice (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No one is polling or being democratic here, but WP:BRD is clear that it is up to you to justify additions to the article not to others who remove them with a reason. Information about incidents or events with this community's police department should be on an article about the police department- (and not called "scandal" which is a loaded term) because if there are that many incidents, there would probably be enough reliable sources to consider it notable. 331dot (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This info belongs as per Wikipedia:Notability. Warminster police misconduct has dominated local headlines for decades and is an important part of their history. Only the obviously noteworthy, encyclopedic entries have been added. There are many other incidents not listed which probably could be. Google "Warminster police corruption" for "About 71,300 results".--PhiladelphiaInjustice (talk) 12:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not saying it doesn't belong or that it is not notable; I am saying it needs its own article, one for the police department itself.  The community is much more than the police department.  The numerous sources are more than sufficient to sustain an article. The edit warring notice was not necessary and only told me what I've been trying to tell you- that you must justify your changes to this page per WP:BRD, if they are reverted. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

text: Given your agenda to post incidents of police misconduct I should think you would want this to have its own page. 331dot (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

text:  Do you have any comment? I may start a Request for Comment or a Third Opinion listing. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: My misunderstood and misleading username notwithstanding, please refrain from telling me what my agenda is. Kindly note that I have made many positive contributions about the police. I have already provided justifications for keeping the referenced info in the article. I do not want to start a separate article about Warminster police misconduct because it might unfairly harm their department's reputation. Such a page would possibly be the second link to appear on an Internet search! My research suggests that Warminster's cops are not nearly as crooked as, say, New York City's or Chicago's, at least judging by what the media has exposed. Nonetheless, significant police wrongdoing is encyclopedic and an important part of Warminster's history, especially since (I think) three of its five most recent police chiefs have been fired for and/or convicted of on-duty crimes. I am respectfully requesting that you work with me on this matter and offer suggestions on how to keep the info in the article.--PhiladelphiaInjustice (talk) 12:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You state you are concerned about the reputation of the police department but including the information on the page of the entire community makes the community's reputation look bad. Even if it didn't, Wikipedia goes where the sources take it; we post criticism of Barack Obama, Donald Trump, the CIA, and anyone and anything without regard to its reputation. Only if a BLP article has particularly defamatory information or other similar content that must be removed does reputation play into it. Leaving aside all of that, as a matter of information organization I believe it should have its own page.  Can you provide examples (that you weren't involved with) of other communities which have extensive information on its police on the community's page? 331dot (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Police scandals

message: Should this page about a community contain information about misconduct by its police department, or should the information be in a separate page about the police department itself? 331dot (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC re police department info 

message: There's no mention of what Johnsville was. Where was it? Why was it called that? When was it founded? 2600:4040:7844:3A00:D812:2001:6F9E:4780 (talk) 02:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: While there are sources on-line about the Johnsville Naval Air Development Center, a quick search on Google do not turn up any reliable sources about Johnsville itself. Everything in Wikipedia must be verifiable from reliable sources. We can't write about a topic in Wikipedia unless there are reliable sources available about that topic. If you are aware of any reliable sources about Johnsville, Pennsylvania, you can add content supported by such sources to Wikipedia yourself, or you can leave links to on-line sources and hope another editor will do so (but remember, we are all volunteers here, no one has an obligation to perfarm any task on Wikipeida). Donald Albury 13:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnsville