Talk:Police Service of Northern Ireland

message: I do not think it is acceptable to use the ga.wikipedia.org as a reference in this wiki. In any case their is less than 10 instances of the name on google. We (the english wiki) are not in the business of translating terms between languages and then presenting them as if they are the official or accepted term in a given language. If a term is not generally accepted is used then an appropriate citation must be presented on request. No original research applies here, what is on the ga.wikipedia.org website is irrelevant.
Djegan 17:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Irish name

message: The Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) was an extremely controversial police force, seen by many Catholics as a repressive institution that operated to keep them under control and deny their civil rights; some sectors within the Protestant population in Northern Ireland also despised the RUC but it was the Catholics who were the most alienated from this police force (Weitzer 1995).
I have problems with this.
#It is far too simplistic. It says the RUC was "seen by many Catholics as a repressive institution..." I'm a Catholic, and I'm don't agree with this simplistic summary. Yes, I've seen video of RUC officers beating lumps out of peaceful protestors. However while there may have been individuals who were unsavoury, to claim that this sort of behaviour was institutionalised without citations and counterbalancing arguments is unacceptable.
#"many Catholics" and "some sectors within the Protestant community" – This is far too vague for such a forceful argument. What percentage?
#To elaborate on counterbalancing arguments; I think if you include arguments about discrimination etc, you might want to mention that the RUC operated in one of the most extreme environments that any police force ever has. You might want to mention the amount of officers killed and injured on duty. You might also want to mention that while the religious imbalance of its membership was partly due to its image, it was also partly due to fear (i.e. Catholic men and women fearing being targetted by republican terrorist organisations).
#"the Catholics" – This could be termed derogatory in normal conversation and is unacceptable for an encyclopedia. I don't think you'll find any reference to "the blacks" on Wikipedia, and quite rightly. Note no reference to "the Protestants", rather "the Protestant population".  Mark83 12:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph removed

message: Having been a catholic member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary for 15 years and now the Police Service of Northern Ireland, I am shocked to see that the article on the PSNI is so inaccurate and would like to know what qualifications the author has to write it.
The Royal Ulster Constabulary has been and still is known for being the most skilled and competent Police force in the world. The RUC have been asked to assist in Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq due to the level of professionalism within the force. The Catholic population of Northern Ireland did not have a choice to join the RUC due to the republican criminal population of Northern Ireland informing them that they could not join, and if they did they would be removed from their communities. This is common knowledge within all the communities of Northern Ireland. The catholic members of the RUC joined at their own risk and were protected by the RUC for it. It is a total misconception that the catholic communities were not welcome in the RUC and the uneducated should be aware of this. Even today the republican movement within Northern Ireland does not allow the catholic population to join the PSNI without the fear of retribution. The Royal Ulster Constabulary was not a controversial police force unless you are a member of the republican movement. Wikipedia should not be used as a resource of information due to the lack of evidential truth. Oh, and Demiurge read a proper book and not just propaganda and stop talking rubbish. Also be careful with your use of Vandalism as per the Wikipedia term - please read, Wiki vandalism is generally defined as editing a wiki in a way that is intentionally disruptive or destructive. There are four generally acknowledged types of vandalism: deletion of legitimate information, insertion of nonsense or irrelevant content, addition of unwanted commercial links (spam), and policy violations specific to that wiki. Also if you agree with including the Irish language term form the Police service of Northern Ireland then I would suggest that the inclusion of Welsh, Cornish, Ulster-scotch and Gaelic should also be on the article, otherwise Irish should not be present as it has no relevance to the PSNI. Final point at the change-over of the RUC to the PSNI every member of the PSNI was a member of the RUC so your criticisms are irrelevant. --Wallywing 15:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unqualified contributions. 

message: A bit of lateral thinking here on the quota front: recruit Polish Catholics! Almost 1000 of the 7700 applicants to the PSNI are Polish, according to the BBC website today. Yes, clearly it is a legitimate police force, so legitimate it has to go to Poland to get Catholics who accept it. This force is a complete joke. Remember Patten (http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/police/patten/recommend.htm) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6251117.stm 89.100.195.42 13:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Polish Police Service of Northern Ireland?

message: Should collusion be mentioned in a section on this page, the stevend report goes as far as 2003 and the PSNI was founded in 2001 and has the same membership so the allegations relate to current and previous PSNI members? Frainc 09:16 24 January 2007
: No official organisation has at any time made any suggestion of collusion within the PSNI so the answer to this question is, in effect no. I think at this point the term collusion should be clarified. Collusion is when orders are passed down to rank and file from the top levels of a police force to aide a criminal or criminal organisation either directly or covertly. An example of suspected collusion wpuld be the RUC shoot to kill policy of the late 70s early 80s. However if an individual officer or group of officers aides a criminal or criminal gang through their own will and without the knowledge or sanction of their superior officers or colleagues this is not collusion. This is what is known as the bad apple principal. The bad apple principal is the certain knowledge that in any 100 police officers there will be one who puts their own political ends, financial needs or feelings of power above the rule of law. This manifests itself either in aiding the murder of a political opponent or public critic, turning a blind eye to crime for financial gain or simply abusing their power with the general public. This exists, and has always existed in every police force around the world but in the highly charged political context of Northern Ireland has often been cited as collusion to further a political end. Captainbeecher (talk) 22:40, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Collusion

message: They Said They Use Glock 17's But Acctually The PSNI Use The Browning Hi-Power  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.211.127 (talk) 18:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This is also untrue - they were never blue.  They were a much darker green that was often mistaken for black.
The attributable of the term "Black Bastards" is not in reference to the Bottle Green of the RUC Uniform - but refers back to the Royal Black Preceptory. I'll make an edit to this effect in a few days - if no one objects.221.33.114.1 (talk) 14:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Uniform and Equipment

message: I've marked this section for questionable POV status, due to the tone of, 'ignoring the fact that "others" make up a sizable majority of the population', and use of the word "unfortunately".
I think it would be a good idea if someone could edit this to outline arguments in favour of, and against, the positive discrimination policy.
C 13:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recruitment

message: The PSNI has a positive discrimination policy(that is illegal in the UK), of recruiting 50% of its officers from a Roman Catholic background and 50% from a non Roman Catholic background, in order to reverse the serious religious imbalance that existed in the RUC as recommended by the Patten Report. However the Patten Report Stated a recuitment of 50% Catholic and 50% from a Protestant Background. It is not known why the PSNI recuitment is not following the rules set out by the Patten Report or even UK Law positive discrimination The name and symbols of the organisation are designed to avoid alienating either major community. It is hoped that 30% of the force will be made up of Catholics by 2011. By 2006, 20% of PSNI officers were Catholic, compared with just 8.3% of the old RUC.  The reason why Catholics didnt join the RUC was they were attacked by the own not protestants.  It is also to be noted that the ROI police service does not employ from the Northern Ireland (both sides) however the PSNI has to recruit in the ROI.  It must also be pointed out that the ROI police service and the mainland Police Services do not have any such recruitment - that is because they can not get away with it.  Also many of the people affected by this illegal policy is taking the British and Mr Patten to the EU Human Rights. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Craig1212 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd very much like the above author to explain himself. 81.149.145.36 (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Positive Discrimination

message: I'd like to propose a change of the image to something showing the police sub-division of Northern Ireland into policing districts as illustrated here .  I think the current image is too large for the limited information it's conveying, which is basically just the political division of Ireland and available on the Ireland, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland articles. 
I can do the graphic when I get time. I'd also suggest that something similar be applied to the Garda page, but that would require someone with more knowledge and time than me. beano 12:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Change 

message: It is not true to say that the PSNI is the successor to the RUC.  Look at the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 - the PSNI IS the RUC, it has just been renamed.  The force is the Police Service of Northern Ireland incorporating Royal Ulster Constabulary GC.  Traditional unionist 12:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People need to discuss this.  The force was renamed, not reformed.Traditional unionist 18:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not a simple renaming exercise  and the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 says that the PSNI incorporates the RUC it does not say that they are one and the same. --Barryob  Vigeur de dessus 18:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but the act saying that the RUC is now called the PSNI incorp RUC GC, does.  The POlice were reformed, but legally, all that took place was a renaming.  A common misconception that google sees, does not make the truth that it doesn't, any less true or verifiable.Traditional unionist 18:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the act  The body of constables known as the Royal Ulster Constabulary shall continue in being as the Police Service of Northern Ireland (incorporating the Royal Ulster Constabulary) the RUC still exists and was incorporated into the new force the act also made far more changes to the policing in NI than just a change of name  --Barryob  Vigeur de dessus 18:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You've just turned your argument in its head and made mine for me!  The RUC exists today as the PSNI, as does the RIC.  There were reforms to the RUC, but it is more accurate to say it was renamed, perhaps renamed and reformed, but that language is too simplistic.  SImply saying reformed suggests that the RC was dissolved.Traditional unionist 18:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would support renamed and reformed having renamed alone makes out nothing else changed apart from the name. --Barryob  Vigeur de dessus 22:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When you get down to it, practically nothing else changed.  This form of words is better, but not perfect.  It needs workTraditional unionist 22:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Successor 

message: Why is there a map of the island of Ireland rather than the country of Northern Ireland on the main page?  The PSNI have no juristiction in the Republic and in most other references to Northern Ireland the just the map of the country is shown rather than the island? Dionysus99 11:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think probably because the map is to show exactly what you have pointed out, that the PSNI authority only covers a small part of the island of Ireland. I think if you produced a better map, not many people would object. MurphiaMan 12:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I think it would be useful to have a map showing the jurisdictions of all UK forces, perhaps even all British Isles forces.Traditional unionist 22:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think other UK forces have to use maps, as their area of juristiction does not coincided with a well known geographic entity. If someone has sufficent interest to look at the PSNI article, I would imagine they would know the geographic area NI covers. There isn't a map for the Northern Ireland Assembly displaying it's geographical juristiction, perhaps ditch the map and move the badge to the top of the info box? Fasach Nua 10:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Returning to this, I agree.  The map looks a bit silly.Traditional unionist (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Map 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: In light of the new damning accusations pointed at the PSNI, I suggest we create a new section, called Accusations of Incompetence. Anyone in for helping out? see also  Hereitisthen (talk) 11:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling it Omagh bomb investigation would be less pejorative.Traditional unionist (talk) 18:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: My suggestion

message: What is the reasoning for having two separate articles under the two different names given to this police force?  The name changed, but it is still the same force. Mooretwin (talk) 02:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we also merge the B Specials and the UDR, or the UDR with the RIR? --Domer48'fenian' 08:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why should we do that? Presumably you realise that the UDR and the B Specials were not the same organisation? And presumably you also realise that the RIR and the UDR were not the same?  No red herrings, please. Stop opposing everything I suggest just for the sake of it. It is tiresome. Mooretwin (talk) 19:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And every single merger of a regiment, company, organisation, IRA / PIRA / RIRA / CIRA etc.  Leave be! Gavin Lisburn (talk) 16:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ??? Mergers?  What is the relevance? Mooretwin (talk) 19:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks for that Gavin Lisburn I agree. Leave be!--Domer48'fenian' 20:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No I wouldn't agree to a merge of these articles. BigDuncTalk 20:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm shocked. Would you care to give a reason? Mooretwin (talk) 23:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger of RUC and PSNI articles

message: I'll try again in the vain hope that someone might offer an explanation: What is the reasoning for having two separate articles under the two different names given to this police force?  The name changed, but it is still the same force. Mooretwin (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So no-one can offer an explanation? Mooretwin (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Whilst some would call it one force, others can see two forces with a major historical break between them.  To amalgamate them would also make an unweildy sized page to work with.  One could also say merge the RIC to RUC to PSNI and I am sure there are many other examples.  Why would you keep insisting on this merge? Gavin Lisburn (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Others seeing two forces with a major historical break" is POV. The reality is that the force simply changed its name and badge, with a new recruitment policy and some structural reform. Legally the force continued. Officers remained. Staff remained. Premises remained. The chief constable remained. There was continuity in almost everything. Terms and conditions remained. The change was a symbolic one.  RIC-RUC was different due to the obvious change in jurisdiction. Mooretwin (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I would still contend that there is no need to merge the articles.Gavin Lisburn (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: One force = one article. Mooretwin (talk) 22:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger of RUC and PSNI articles II

message: Thiss ection states "...Control of the police has not yet been passed over to the Irish government although an agreement was made in February 2010 ...".  Should it not be Northern Ireland Executive and also updated to the fact that the government has now taken control of justice and policing? Gavin Lisburn (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue appears to have been fixed and is therefore closed.Gavin Lisburn (talk) 13:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Organisation

message: The map of the force area seems to suggest the PSNI has no jurisdiction over Lough Neagh - sorry if this is pedantic, but I don't think that's true? There's no separate force covering the Lough is there? The same map is used on the wikipedia article for the RUC. jdan (talk) 13:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Map of force area

message: The use of both the flag and the badge on this article looks like it is not in line with WP:NFCC#3a as the flag is just the badge on a green background, it is basically two copies of the same copyright image. One should be removed, my question is which one. Mtking (edits)  05:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Remove the flag and make the badge smaller. Bjmullan (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooops I added this back in as I thought it was an omission, to bring it in line with the RUC article. I added captions however - https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/crime/policing-board-s-serious-concern-over-regime-at-garnerville-college-1-7667441
Cyberbeagle (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Apologies for editing the entry above just now, but the <ref> used was causing the URL to appear right at the bottom of the page. I felt in this case it was justified. --10mmsocket (talk) 07:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Badge and Flag 

message: This article shows PSNI with an all Ireland map, shouldn't it be a United Kingdom one. For example a map Los Angeles Police Department area wouldn't show it within a silhouette map of Mexico.C. 22468   Talk to me 14:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: Have they proven themselves to be impartial? I think a section on impartiality (or lack of) is warranted. ÓCorcráin (talk) 12:52, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impartial 

message: The passage below was added to the Footnotes section on 24 June 2012:
I'm not sure how relevant it is, but I don't think it's written in the right place so I've moved it here instead. Fuebaey (talk) 17:02, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance to article? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Police Service of Northern Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100218113901/http://www.nihrc.org/dms/data/NIHRC/attachments/dd/files/114/Response_on_review_of_Police_(NI)_Act_temporary_provisions_2009_(January_2010).pdf to http://www.nihrc.org/dms/data/NIHRC/attachments/dd/files/114/Response_on_review_of_Police_%28NI%29_Act_temporary_provisions_2009_%28January_2010%29.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Police Service of Northern Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101214082755/http://www.nio.gov.uk/50_50_consultation_paper_october_2009.pdf to http://www.nio.gov.uk/50_50_consultation_paper_october_2009.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Police Service of Northern Ireland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090301052406/http://www.oversightcommissioner.org:80/press/articles.asp?page=press&pressId=44 to http://www.oversightcommissioner.org/press/articles.asp?page=press&pressId=44
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Police Service of Northern Ireland. 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/20140402133000/http://www.psni.police.uk/lateral_entry.pdf to http://www.psni.police.uk/lateral_entry.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513195243/http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/police/patten/recommend.htm to http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/police/patten/recommend.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070827082253/http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761571415&pn=6 to http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761571415&pn=6
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) 00:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Police Service of Northern Ireland. 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/20150711043237/http://www.psni.police.uk/index/about-us.htm to http://www.psni.police.uk/index/about-us.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141019210315/http://www.nipolicingboard.org.uk/article/?id=15031 to http://www.nipolicingboard.org.uk/article/?id=15031
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090318192302/http://www.psni.police.uk/irish.pdf to http://www.psni.police.uk/irish.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140403050340/http://www.psni.police.uk/use_of_bicycles_by_psni.pdf to http://www.psni.police.uk/use_of_bicycles_by_psni.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140402192532/http://www.psni.police.uk/blackberry_mobile_phones.pdf to http://www.psni.police.uk/blackberry_mobile_phones.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040222214421/http://atlasgeo.span.ch/fotw/flags/gb-ni-ps.html to http://atlasgeo.span.ch/fotw/flags/gb-ni-ps.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) 16:36, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Police Service of Northern Ireland. 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/20070930155127/http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?pt=n&id=76432 to http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?pt=n&id=76432
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) 17:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems like all the subheadings and their content under Specialist Section have just been copy/pasted from https://www.psni.police.uk/inside-psni/our-departments/ without any attribution.
EG https://www.psni.police.uk/inside-psni/our-departments/operational-support/armed-response-unit/ is word for word identical to the Armed Response Unit section here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.53.75.214 (talk) 02:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out. It's a shame nobody addressed it for nearly two years. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:09, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specialist Section Copy/Pasted 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.psni.police.uk/inside-psni/our-departments/operational-support/tactical-support-group/. It was also copied from https://www.psni.police.uk/inside-psni/our-departments/operational-support/armed-response-unit/ 
Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  10mmsocket (talk) 06:58, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I replaced the copyvio text, but t.b.h. I think what I left in its place is too much of a close paraphrase, so it should also be removed. I'll let a copyvio specialist judge on that. --10mmsocket (talk) 07:00, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I think this article could benefit from a History section. A lot of the article, (currently), is about the 2001 formation of the PSNI, lots about the hierarchy of it, the ranks, their logo, their flag, their patches, and then there is a little bit about the recent data breaches. The Accountability section could use some work as well. This is a contentious article judging from the talk page, so changes or additions I make are going to be sourced and written within Wikipedia style and guidelines. Its choosday innit (talk) 19:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding to accountability section/ proposing new section