Talk:The Thin Blue Line (disambiguation)

message: Shouldn't this be two separate articles? E.g. The Thin Blue Line (sitcom) and The Thin Blue Line (documentary film). Then The Thin Blue Line could be a disambiguation page. Alternatively, whichever one is more famous (a tricky decision - probably just depends on whether one is American or British) could get the page to itself, with the more obscure one getting a parenthetical qualifier. Or it could just be left as it is. What do other people think? -- Oliver PEREIRA 04:42 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)
: I think you're right. I also think (television) and (film) would be better indicators (both of which seem to be standard on Wiki') - stewacide 14:44 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)
::If you decide to disambiguate, make it (film), certainly; I don't know about (television) (not my area of expertise, if I have an area of expertise).  :-)  --KQ
More propoganda, NPOV, etc. Why are all these articles slanted towards Law Enforcement?75.72.92.166 (talk) 09:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Systemic bias. LEOs who are Wikipedians are more likely than non-LEOs to extensively edit articles related to their occupation—you write what you know, after all. Among those editors, with such an emotionally-charged subject, some are certain to have strong feelings which result in a non-neutral point of view, sometimes without even realizing it. Most of it will be sorted out over time by those Wikipedians (LEOs included) who have a better eye for bias, including their own, but some of it is bound to linger due to the same phenomenon (editors failing to recognize the bias they share, less knowledgeable editors unwilling to tackle the problem themselves). 70.172.214.70 (talk) 02:45, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Thin Blue Line (emblem) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 23:46, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: I’m concerned about the dubious dramatic political implications in the introduction 2601:201:C180:3E00:2975:2BB:E66D:611D (talk) 04:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hate 

message: This entire disambiguation is not merely biased but a bit unhinged. Claiming that it is a white supremacy symbol is a little puzzling, and equating it to the swastika is frankly insulting. Symbols carry many meanings depending on who you ask, and this one can certainly be controversial, if not problematic in the eyes of many for various reasons. But nowhere mentioned in this is the actual interpretation of the "thin blue line" and how it has been used for decades. It's recent usage relates to protests and recent public debates about the role of police un American society. The thin blue line refers to police being a small number of individuals standing between chaos and organized society. Controversial as that image may be, it has very little to do with white supremacy or Nazism. It may be a response to Black Lives Matter protests and activism, and to many be seen as a defense of systemic racism, directly or indirectly. This page should be rewritten to reflect the actual meaning of the symbol as understood by those who use it, and further should not make unsupported comparisons with overt white supremacist symbolism like swastikas. 2600:1700:165F:9350:14FB:B05C:73B1:A783 (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual Inaccuracy, Spurious Claims, Lack of Neutrality