Talk:Shomrim (neighborhood watch group)

message: Is it just me, or does this entire article seem like a love letter to this organization?
122.148.184.76 06:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can write it better, why don't you?--Redaktor 14:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should be flagged for cleanup. 

message: I can personally testify to the great work shomrim does. I have seen them save a life on one occasion and have called upon them when I was in distress and you can be certain they pulled through for me. I will go even further and say that even when it comes to non-emergency's they are there to help, like lock-outs etc. Also what it says in the article that shmira has more units then shomrim this is true in quantity but certainly not in quality. It says in the article that's most residence prefer to call shmira over shomrim, I have trouble digesting that fact for as I live in crownheights and between the peopole I know most of them have the shomrim hot-line on speed-dial. Also as of the present shmira is not under the auspices of the crownheights community council. May shomrim have much success crownheights loves you!.                                     66.8.202.60 (talk) 21:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  crownheights shomrim 

message: Its irrelevant whether you agree or not with the Shomrim's action. The way this thing reads is definitely *not* an encyclopedic article, but a blanket pamphlet of this group. Someone should write it better.  How could you possibly argue that a words like "ingenuity" and the like are products of a particular marketing and not an objective argument? 76.15.177.207 (talk) 12:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agreeing to cleanup this mess 

message: It was very kind of the previous editors to note that this article is POV but not touch it. I have flagged it as POV. The article was unbelievable: "The organization's professionalism is exemplary." "From the beginning, the Maccabees established itself as a citizen task-force that worked hand-in-hand with the local authorities, never overstepping the boundaries of its own capabilities." And there is no mention of the 1991 Crown Heights riots, in which these task forces played a significant role. Ipsenaut (talk) 05:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I keep trying to fix article and make it factual, but it keeps getting changed back to the same public relations lies.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Attention whore (talk • contribs) 22:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're clearly trying to be inflammatory, if you have criticism of the group (I'm sure you do) phrase it in neutral manner without commentary and source it and it will stay - Schrandit (talk) 22:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trying to clean up article 

message: This article is difficult to use. Mostly because it has no inline references. Additionally such references may help to resolve the ongoing neutrality dispute. Please note I am not taking sides in any squabbles, but encyclopedias need citations. Awg1010 (talk) 04:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No footnotes 

message: I went through the article and removed:
*links in violation of WP:EL
*sections on individual organisations - there could be an infinite number of these and there is no room for them all. All were unreferenced, some with six month old fact tags. Most were poorly written or just straight out adverts.
Several people have reinserted material without discussion. Please try and explain what you think should be in the article. It is not acceptable to just re-add things that have been removed without discussion. ninety:one   17:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup January 2010 

message: Rather than this be an article about a given organization that seems to be failing WP:N, I'd like to shift this to an article about independent Jewish neighborhood patrol groups.
*BBC article
*Haaretz about the CSG in Australia
*CSG official description
*British Jewish Security grou
*
*NY shomrim investigation
*NY civlian patrol review
*NY Anti terror group
There are groups like this most European communities, in South Africa, in Australia and in some North American communities.  If there are no objections I'm going to redo this article to include the broader topic.  Joe407 (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to have a go, but I can't see any organisations really being notable enough at the moment. ninety:one   17:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested move 

message: Roscelese raised a good question: What is the topic of this article?  Is it about a specific orginazation called "Shomrim"?  Is it about all groups called "Shomrim"?  Is it about Jewish community watch groups to which the Hebrew term "shomrim" can be applied?  Personaly, I would go with option #3 because as a concept Jewish community watch groups is widepread enough and have collectively recieved enough media converage that it passes WP:N.  None of the individual groups have sufficient individual notability or coverage to pass WP:N and there is no overall orginazation called "Shomrim", just individual groups using the term for its name recognition.  What do you this is the topic of this article? Joe407 (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think a group needs to have "shomrim" in its name in order to be part of the topic discussed here (although all of most of the ones that I would say belong here do use the term) - I think it is necessary that some source describe the group as shomrim, either the group themselves or a third-party source, to avoid original research. I think you're right that the individual groups are not notable, but that the type of group is notable. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understood it when I came across the stub (sorry, I neglected to check the talk page before undertaking my rewrite and expansion), this article is about the Orthodox Jewish Shomrim organization founded in Brooklyn in the late 1970s / early 1980s which has been expanded to a few other cities. It is a specific model of Orthodox Jewish volunteers patrolling their own neighborhoods, with training and licensing from police, and has adequate sourcing from a wide variety of reliable sources. Regarding other Jewish neighborhood watch organizations such as those in Melbourne and Sydney, I think they should be put in a paragraph under Neighborhood watch (and a link to the main article on Shomrim could also be put there). Yoninah (talk) 15:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great edits Yoninah! --pastasauce (talk) 15:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Yoninah (talk) 15:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I really appreciate all the content you've added. However, it's had the effect of creating a criticism ghetto - where positive information about the shomrim appears in the main text under "operations" and under the individual groups, but negative information appears in a section of its own at the bottom of the article - which is frowned upon. Can we integrate the "Police relations" section better? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

text: It is my understanding that the Shomrim groups in different cities are not branches but independent spin-offs of the same concept. To my knowledge, the Brooklyn, Monsey and London Shomrim are all run by Hasidim, which is not the case for general Jewish neighborhood watch groups. I will try to fine-tune the article a bit more with yours and Roscelese's observations. Yoninah (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If they are all independant then we should define the article's subject as Volunteer Jewish community watch groups.  Joe407 (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They appear to be independent, but to avoid OR and indiscriminateness, we should define it as volunteer Jewish community watch groups that call themselves shomrim or are called shomrim by reliable sources. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Joe: Do you mean that you'd rename the page Jewish volunteer community watch groups, and make Shomrim a subsection? Wouldn't that pare down a lot of information about the Shomrim groups into a paragraph or two? The Shomrim patrols in Brooklyn, Monsey, Baltimore and London really do have a lot more in common with each other than with general Jewish neighborhood watch groups. Yoninah (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Who are Shomrim?

message: oops.  thanks user Roscelese for catching my NYPD Shormrim patch addition GOOF and explaining it --in the edit summary code at lest.  good that the article's got a caretaker these days.  Cramyourspam (talk) 22:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it. That patch looked like the Brooklyn South Shomrim, not the NYPD. Yoninah (talk) 22:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a NYPD patch, though (I had the same thought as you, so I ran a search on "NYPD patch" - they all look like that, it's just the text that's different). My guess is that the unit to which the owner of the patch belongs happens to patrol in South Brooklyn. But I could be wrong - do the non-police shomrim wear NYPD patches at all? Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the Brooklyn South Shomrim Patrol patch! This is real, even if it looks like the NYPD one. Check out the general facebook page for the shomrim over here for much more patches. Theres probably even more info over there to add, but I dont use facebook! I will revert to the cramyourspam edit soon. --pastasauce (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha, you're right! I guess that means it doesn't belong on the other shomrim page. And that we may have to work on the "police relations" content... Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  patch --i goofed 

message: http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-09-07/news/gotham-s-crusaders-shomrim-jewish-neighborhood-patrol/
Joe407 (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like they picked up the lead from the Jewish Week's lashon hara and interviewed the guy himself. I only read the first page, which regurgitates the NYT and WSJ coverage. I think we have enough reliable sources without this. Yoninah (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, it's quite long and detailed, and as you yourself admit, it's not simply a reprint of other newspapers' coverage, given that it interviews other people. The fact that you disagree with it doesn't make it lashon hara, and it's rather shameful that you'd think coverage intended to expose harmful practices so that they might be corrected is worse than letting those practices continue. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Profile in the Village Voice 

message: I don't know why this edit was restored. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shomrim_%28neighborhood_watch_group%29&diff=565191687&oldid=565155013 We do not do background checks on the Shomrim. They might do it on themselves through a private agency but they are not being doing through any police agency.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by New England Cop (talk • contribs) 00:05, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you then explain why the source states that volunteers are fingerprinted and background-checked? (Is it possible that in your New England jurisdiction they are not, but in Brooklyn, which the source is about, they are?) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Your professional interest is appreciated, but I'm afraid we can't prefer this sort of hearsay to reliable sources. On the other hand, the source (Wall St. Journal) attributes the statement to the Shomrim coordinator, so it seems like a good idea that we do the same. What do you think of that? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

text: Think of it this way - On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. The WSJ might not have looked any further than Daskal, the person it quoted, but because the information in the article is cited to the WSJ, we know exactly where it comes from. On the other hand, how can we know that you talked to LEOs in Brooklyn? How can we know that they said there are no checks? It might be worth a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard anyway, but keep in mind that anecdotal evidence isn't really admissible here. (And yeah, sometimes it sucks because there are definitely times when the reliable sources are wrong! But they're all we have to go on.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background checks 

message: I'm thinking of removing the subsection of "In popular culture" and just adding the link within that section, into the "External Links" subsection. I'm in the view that this is not so relevant to the main article. Please share your views. -- VarifiedEditor (talk) 09:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe link the film in see also rather than using the reference as an external link? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture 

message: These engagement events are very much some of the highlights of the work Shomrim do, but yet very little about this is featured on this page, I feel that at least in the sub-section of the individual Shomrim organizations, that more than just one line should be permitted. I'm referring to the last paragraph in the Stamford Hill Shomrim section, as you can see from the linked source, that this was a major event for Shomrim and the Police and the public, with many law enforcement agencies participating, you even had the Police Helicopter do stunts overhead which is not an everyday occurrence, and the Hackney Police Borough Commander participated too and made a statement (as featured in the linked source). I very much understand that a Wikipedia page should not be a promotional page, but surely that doesn't mean that because this content is of a positive nature, it cannot be elaborated in more detail, details that would interest an in-depth reader interested in the activities of a local Shomrim. I'm awaiting a response on this, especially from Dweller and Roscelese. --VarifiedEditor (talk) 16:02, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything encyclopedic about inflating the section with text such as "a fun packed event" or "an absolute pleasure." This is evidently included only for promotional purposes. Since WP is an encyclopedia and as such reflects other sources rather than being itself any sort of analysis, we would need more good-quality sources about these events in order to expand our coverage of them. Even then, we would have to keep in mind that WP:ROUTINE coverage is not the same as actual investigative news of the sort that we cite in the rest of the article. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What Roscelese said. --Dweller (talk) 08:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about including the Police and council departments that attended? Plus a line quoting the Police borough commander? which in my view reflects the standard of the event. --VarifiedEditor (talk) 12:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP:NOTNEWS. This article is about an international organisation. Waxing lyrical about the marvellous, fantastical event organised one year by one branch is definitively WP:UNDUE, not to mention WP:RECENTISM. --15:02, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engagement Events 

message: Quote: Some Brooklyn patrols have marked cars which resemble New York City Police Department vehicles, but most use their own, unmarked cars.
This doesn't make sense. Maikel (talk) 08:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cars 

message: This received lots of international attention including from US secretary of state John Kerry, and US ambassador to the UN Ambassador Samantha Power, this was also featured in the international news and media outlets, therefore, I thought it would be appropriate to add the details in a new category, rather than hidden within the subsection of Stamford Hill Shomrim, so that people that come to this page would see it as one of the headlines about Shomrim.
Please share your views.
-- VarifiedEditor (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree that this was necessary, and I think you have not yet learned that Wikipedia is not the place to promote your organization. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shomrim and their work for the Muslim community in London 

message: A recent edit now has the last sentence of the lead -- placed in its own paragraph -- reading: 
:Shomrim organizations have a history of conflict with non-Jews and patrol members have been convicted of assaults and misdemeanors against African-American  and other civilians
This new lead edit seems to be based on a sentence in the Operations section of the article which says "Shomrim organizations have occasionally been criticized for using excessive force with suspects, particularly non-Jews" and two or three subsequent mentions of Shomrim volunteers getting into trouble while on watch. I don't see any of this meriting the assertion of a history of conflict with non-Jews in the lead. Seems like a rather gross exaggeration and what our rules call undue weight. The body of the article does not indicate violent misbehavior by the Shomrim to be a systemic problem. Motsebboh (talk) 00:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: An editor has wisely removed the offending sentence. Barring any disagreement here, I guess the issue is resolved.. Motsebboh (talk) 03:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, sources do draw attention to a pattern, rather than just describing individual incidents. Do not stalk me; I'm tired of telling you this. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:04, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "A history of conflict with non-Jews?"

message: "Suspects" really isn't appropriate here. The Shomrim aren't a law enforcement organization (if I go up and hit a guy, even if I see him vandalizing a car, or tossing a water balloon, that doesn't make him a "suspect"), and in at least one of the cited cases, the claim that they jumped the guy because they thought he was committing a crime was discovered to be a post-facto justification for attacking him. Moreover, the recent NYT source (cited) points out that this is particularly an issue with Shomrim's black neighbors, and other sources (not in article) were pointing out that Shomrim targeted black people and other minorities long before the Patterson thing happened. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "suspects" 

message: Probably relevant for the Brooklyn chapter, just dropping this here as I don't currently have time to write anything. The New York Times - Lawyer for Hasidic Man Convicted in Assault Calls Him a ‘Scapegoat’ --Pudeo (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brooklyn shomrim racial attack conviction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Shomrim (neighborhood watch group). 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/20110812062551/https://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/49093 to http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/49093
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150422220145/http://gothamist.com/2012/11/13/photos_liev_schreiber_as_williamsbu.php to http://gothamist.com/2012/11/13/photos_liev_schreiber_as_williamsbu.php
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) 06:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: E.g. this gentleman in the UK criticised them:
 On Monday 14th May, 2018, at Southwark Crown Court, London, Jeremy Bedford-Turner was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment, six to be in custody, the rest to be served under licence. Better known as Jez Turner, Chairman and organiser of The London Forum, he was convicted of 'Incitement to Racial Hatred' under Britain's increasingly contentious race hate laws. He was pursued for nearly three years by a charity calling itself The Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) who were determined to make an example of him after he staged an Anti-Shomrim protest near Whitehall in July 2015. The Shomrim are a type of private police force, or vigilante group, formed for the protection of London's Jewish residents. They use cars that look like police vehicles, and its volunteers look like uniformed police officers. Mr Turner asked why no other racially-exclusive group is allowed to form its own private protection force, and behave like an official branch of the police.
Sample RS: 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jeremy-bedford-turner-race-hate-speech-antimsemitism-british-soldier-england-jewish-control-a8352561.html
-> Let us add it. 
See also related Talk above. Zezen (talk) 09:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section missing 

message: 1. The sources do attest convictions 2. Our article on mesirah states that it may apply only to reporting crimes to abusive rather than legitimate authority, but this article isn't really the place to debate that point of disagreement. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent reverts 

message: This is a voluntary service brigade intended to keep the peace in largely their own communities.  What is the necessity to have the introductory article dedicate over 50% of the space on various criticisms about what was said in criticism about them?  Every group who confronts criminals will have the criminals complaining about them?  It's totally unnecessary.  There can be a section "Criticism" and then put all that in that section, but the intro paragraph should tell the world what and who they are, what they do, and what their purpose is.  It would be like having an entry for "Toronto Police Department" "Toronto Police police Toronto and John Doe said they suck." Historiaantiqua (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessarily critical article