![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMHO, if an incident did not get substantial secondary national coverage then it is unlikely to belong as the "history" of a police department. YMMV, so what is the importance of, say, hiring a person who was let go from another PD unless that person gets involved in an incident for which they are found culpable? Collect ( talk) 18:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
IMO,
Is subject to WP:BLP. The source is an opinion column from HuffPo, and elides an acquittal for that officer. Sorry -- the BLP violation is blatant and must be removed -- the source used is insufficient for the contentious claim, and the claim in the article elides the acquittal. Collect ( talk) 22:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Is this list useful? Does it represent actual ranks of officers in this PD? Or is it "well we have this list somewhere, so let's add it here" sort of useless information? If it is useful, can someone find the name of the Lt. Col. for this force please? Collect ( talk) 17:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
A lot of content in this NBCnews online article: video, pictures, and text including future investigation of the police department.
Headline-1: Darren Wilson Described Michael Brown as 'Crazy,' Intent on Killing Him
QUOTE: "According to grand jury records released Monday night, Wilson was asked several times by two Ferguson police detectives on Sunday, Aug. 10, what he was thinking during the confrontation. Wilson replied: "He's gonna kill me. How do I survive? How do I live through this, basically?" Later in the interview, Wilson said Brown was physically uncontrollable and "for lack of a better word, crazy. I've never seen that. I mean, it was very aggravated, aggressive, hostile. Just, you couldn't, you could, you could tell he was lookin' through [you]."" -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.
Headline-2: Crowds gather outside Ferguson Police Department
Set of pictures: fires started. -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.
Headline-3: Protests Flare After Ferguson Police Officer Is Not Indicted
QUOTE: "Word of the decision set off a new wave of anger among hundreds who had gathered outside the Ferguson Police Department. Police officers in riot gear stood in a line as demonstrators chanted and threw signs and other objects toward them as the news spread. “The system failed us again,” one woman said. In downtown Ferguson, the sound of breaking glass could be heard as crowds ran through the streets." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:49, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing. There is a good map, showing where eight fires were started, five other locations of violence, and the proximity of the areas of interest around Ferguson Avenue.
Headline-4: What’s next? Justice continues its probe of Ferguson Police Department.
QUOTE: "The Justice Department still has two opportunities to bring criminal charges and overhaul the Ferguson Police Department in the case that grew from the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown. In September, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. launched a federal investigation of the Missouri city’s police force to examine whether officers routinely engaged in racial profiling or showed a pattern of excessive force. Investigators from Justice’s Civil Rights Division are reviewing the training officers receive on racial profiling and the use of force, including deadly force." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.
I have placed an undue tag on the article as more than half the article talks about alleged misconduct and the Ferguson police shooting involving Michael Brown. Is there any positive news that can be added to the article to balance out all of the negativity? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Nothing is stopping any editor from adding more material about other aspects of this police department. WP:UNDUE, tells us that (my highlight) Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources'. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I've renamed the section previously titled "Misconduct" to "Controversies" since no instances of misconduct are verifiable. While it's clear that lots of folks think there has been widespread misconduct (and it may well be true), we have to go with the facts, and no facts presented here can support the highly POV judgement of "Misconduct" - if you read it, it presents quite the opposite findings under the law. Misconduct is "wrongful, improper, or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated or intentional purpose or by obstinate indifference to the consequences of one's acts" and no sources supplied support this. WP:EXCEPTIONAL applies. The Dissident Aggressor 22:15, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
This section was becoming a secondary outlet for coverage of the shooting and subsequent action, rather than a summary that points back to the main articles. I've attempted to clean this up and leave just the basic facts. The incident is very significant, but there is no need to go through all the details in this article as well as the other two. The Dissident Aggressor 23:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The second sentence in that section is incorrect. It states "While Chief of Police Tom Jackson claimed in a news conference that Brown had been a suspect in a 'strong-arm' robbery, but later stated that the robbery was not connected to Officer Wilson's interaction with Brown.", citing a March 11, 2015 Washington Post article which quotes the Ferguson Chief of Police to that effect. However, that statement is in direct contradiction with Officer Wilson's own testimony and with the recording transcripts from Ferguson Police dispatch, showing that Wilson confirmed, immediately before his interaction with Brown, that he had heard the report of the robbery and description of the suspect. Here is the statement from the US Department of Justice's official findings: "As Wilson drove past Brown, he saw cigarillos in Brown’s hand, which alerted him to a radio dispatch of a 'stealing in progress' that he heard a few minutes prior while finishing his last call. Wilson then checked his rearview mirror, and realized that Witness 101 matched the description of the other subject on the radio dispatch." official report I think it's safe to say that the DoJ's report is more authoritative than Chief Jackson's hearsay. I will change the passage in this article to reflect that. Bricology ( talk) 17:25, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
None of what you have suggested is obvious or factual, and it borders on WP:OR. It's not the role of this article to re-litigate the DOJ investigation. -- TimothyDexter ( talk) 20:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
A good summary is available here [1] - Cwobeel (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Under the heading "Incidents: 2014 shooting of Michael Brown and unrest", it states "...two-thirds of the residents (of Ferguson) are black and all but three of the police force's fifty-three officers are white", citing a link to the Kansas City Star. This gives an unbalanced impression, since it does not explain why this racial disparity exists and, in the context, implies that the ethnic composition of the Department may have been intentionally skewed away from black membership, which may not be the case. Police departments cannot accept recruits who have a felony conviction. A significantly higher percentage of black men have felony convictions than white men do, which may be the more significant factor in determining the ethnic composition of the Department. Unless this can be clarified and balanced context provided, I think that the statement as written violates WP:NPOV and should be removed. Bricology ( talk) 19:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Ferguson Police Department (Missouri). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
IMHO, if an incident did not get substantial secondary national coverage then it is unlikely to belong as the "history" of a police department. YMMV, so what is the importance of, say, hiring a person who was let go from another PD unless that person gets involved in an incident for which they are found culpable? Collect ( talk) 18:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
IMO,
Is subject to WP:BLP. The source is an opinion column from HuffPo, and elides an acquittal for that officer. Sorry -- the BLP violation is blatant and must be removed -- the source used is insufficient for the contentious claim, and the claim in the article elides the acquittal. Collect ( talk) 22:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Is this list useful? Does it represent actual ranks of officers in this PD? Or is it "well we have this list somewhere, so let's add it here" sort of useless information? If it is useful, can someone find the name of the Lt. Col. for this force please? Collect ( talk) 17:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
A lot of content in this NBCnews online article: video, pictures, and text including future investigation of the police department.
Headline-1: Darren Wilson Described Michael Brown as 'Crazy,' Intent on Killing Him
QUOTE: "According to grand jury records released Monday night, Wilson was asked several times by two Ferguson police detectives on Sunday, Aug. 10, what he was thinking during the confrontation. Wilson replied: "He's gonna kill me. How do I survive? How do I live through this, basically?" Later in the interview, Wilson said Brown was physically uncontrollable and "for lack of a better word, crazy. I've never seen that. I mean, it was very aggravated, aggressive, hostile. Just, you couldn't, you could, you could tell he was lookin' through [you]."" -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.
Headline-2: Crowds gather outside Ferguson Police Department
Set of pictures: fires started. -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.
Headline-3: Protests Flare After Ferguson Police Officer Is Not Indicted
QUOTE: "Word of the decision set off a new wave of anger among hundreds who had gathered outside the Ferguson Police Department. Police officers in riot gear stood in a line as demonstrators chanted and threw signs and other objects toward them as the news spread. “The system failed us again,” one woman said. In downtown Ferguson, the sound of breaking glass could be heard as crowds ran through the streets." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:49, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing. There is a good map, showing where eight fires were started, five other locations of violence, and the proximity of the areas of interest around Ferguson Avenue.
Headline-4: What’s next? Justice continues its probe of Ferguson Police Department.
QUOTE: "The Justice Department still has two opportunities to bring criminal charges and overhaul the Ferguson Police Department in the case that grew from the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown. In September, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. launched a federal investigation of the Missouri city’s police force to examine whether officers routinely engaged in racial profiling or showed a pattern of excessive force. Investigators from Justice’s Civil Rights Division are reviewing the training officers receive on racial profiling and the use of force, including deadly force." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 14:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.
I have placed an undue tag on the article as more than half the article talks about alleged misconduct and the Ferguson police shooting involving Michael Brown. Is there any positive news that can be added to the article to balance out all of the negativity? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 01:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Nothing is stopping any editor from adding more material about other aspects of this police department. WP:UNDUE, tells us that (my highlight) Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources'. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I've renamed the section previously titled "Misconduct" to "Controversies" since no instances of misconduct are verifiable. While it's clear that lots of folks think there has been widespread misconduct (and it may well be true), we have to go with the facts, and no facts presented here can support the highly POV judgement of "Misconduct" - if you read it, it presents quite the opposite findings under the law. Misconduct is "wrongful, improper, or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated or intentional purpose or by obstinate indifference to the consequences of one's acts" and no sources supplied support this. WP:EXCEPTIONAL applies. The Dissident Aggressor 22:15, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
This section was becoming a secondary outlet for coverage of the shooting and subsequent action, rather than a summary that points back to the main articles. I've attempted to clean this up and leave just the basic facts. The incident is very significant, but there is no need to go through all the details in this article as well as the other two. The Dissident Aggressor 23:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The second sentence in that section is incorrect. It states "While Chief of Police Tom Jackson claimed in a news conference that Brown had been a suspect in a 'strong-arm' robbery, but later stated that the robbery was not connected to Officer Wilson's interaction with Brown.", citing a March 11, 2015 Washington Post article which quotes the Ferguson Chief of Police to that effect. However, that statement is in direct contradiction with Officer Wilson's own testimony and with the recording transcripts from Ferguson Police dispatch, showing that Wilson confirmed, immediately before his interaction with Brown, that he had heard the report of the robbery and description of the suspect. Here is the statement from the US Department of Justice's official findings: "As Wilson drove past Brown, he saw cigarillos in Brown’s hand, which alerted him to a radio dispatch of a 'stealing in progress' that he heard a few minutes prior while finishing his last call. Wilson then checked his rearview mirror, and realized that Witness 101 matched the description of the other subject on the radio dispatch." official report I think it's safe to say that the DoJ's report is more authoritative than Chief Jackson's hearsay. I will change the passage in this article to reflect that. Bricology ( talk) 17:25, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
None of what you have suggested is obvious or factual, and it borders on WP:OR. It's not the role of this article to re-litigate the DOJ investigation. -- TimothyDexter ( talk) 20:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
A good summary is available here [1] - Cwobeel (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Under the heading "Incidents: 2014 shooting of Michael Brown and unrest", it states "...two-thirds of the residents (of Ferguson) are black and all but three of the police force's fifty-three officers are white", citing a link to the Kansas City Star. This gives an unbalanced impression, since it does not explain why this racial disparity exists and, in the context, implies that the ethnic composition of the Department may have been intentionally skewed away from black membership, which may not be the case. Police departments cannot accept recruits who have a felony conviction. A significantly higher percentage of black men have felony convictions than white men do, which may be the more significant factor in determining the ethnic composition of the Department. Unless this can be clarified and balanced context provided, I think that the statement as written violates WP:NPOV and should be removed. Bricology ( talk) 19:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Ferguson Police Department (Missouri). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)