Jump to content

Talk:ACT Policing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Death of police chief

[edit]

This site http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/act-police-chief-found-dead/2007/04/20/1176697095817.html is reporting that Audrey Fagan has died.

Appropriate forum for behaviour of police

[edit]

To whom it may concern.

There have been a number of edits to this talk page complaining about the behaviour of the Australian Federal Police.

This page is for discussion about the content of the article, and is not an effective or appropriate place to try to address issues about the police force itself. This is an encyclopedia and it is not able to assist in resolving issues, real or perceived, with the police force itself.

If you have issues with the police force itself, and-or its members, you need to report them via the AFP website, specifically, Feedback and Complaints.

Or you can contact the Commonwealth Law Enforcement Ombudsman.

Or you can contact the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.

Aoziwe (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can report a crime by a member of the ACT police via Feedback and Complaints, corruption or not corruption.

There is Crime Stoppers to report any information related to any criminal matter, perpetrated by anyone, corruption or not corruption, anonymously if you wish.

And there is reporting a crime in the ACT or Further contact details

Aoziwe (talk) 12:19, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on ACT Policing. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:41, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the .ashx file is actually a .pdf Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs to be reviewed as it promotes an image of an organisation that is false

[edit]

Content found on the page is to create a fake organisation which does not exist in reality. There are NO facts to be obtained via a court system where the police settle sexual abuse cases made against the police through the use of any non-pubic-court-process and under condition of keeping the case a secret — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.119.121 (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide some sources such a newspaper stories, or journal articles that talk about this. Then someone can write about it in the article. But we don't include information that one person has discovered by themselves, as that is WP:original research. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Police training materials do not list crimes which are committed - publishers are linked with newspapers. Plenty of online journal articles if you include this page becoming a diary of police abuses. Point taken and ill have a story published ASAP where I will then ask that its posted here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.174.170.238 (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please try and understand that Wikipedia articles are only intended to reflect information which can be verified in independent reliable sources. Editors are asked to summarize the information they find in such sources in their own words and in a neutral manner. Negative content about the ACT can be added to the article, but it has to be worded in a neutral manner and it has to reflect coverage received in reliable sources. Wikipedia's role is not to to take a stand or to try and right some great wrong. Moreover, "reliable source" has a specific meaning when it comes to Wikipedia and typically only sources which are considered to have an established and strong reputation of editorial control are generally considered appropriate. Blogs, personal websites, social media accounts, etc. are considered to be user generated content and are generally not considered reliable for Wikipedia. So, if you are able to find stories about issues related to the ACT which have been covered by major newspapers, magazines, etc., it may be possible to add such content to the article as long as doing so is in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If your purpose, however, is simply to try and make the ACT look bad (even if they really have done bad things) by adding content to promote that particular viewpoint, then Wikipedia is not really the place for you. You probably should take a look at Wikipedia:Advocacy and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not to make sure understand what Wikipedia's intended role is. You should also understand that article content decisions are primarily based upon a consensus achieved through discussion and anything you add can be removed if other editors feel it does not belong in the article per relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Readers should note that the above text of a nature in design to redirect content is an afront to any acceptable standard. Therefor if the above statement were taken into account then according to wiki.. the newspaper of Canberra times and online version of ABC24 using text of 'two-year bond' is correct.. the court applying a bond of 3 years must of been the mistake... The newspaper would never print a retraction and as stated it would be of personal research to apply the counter document from a court stating the term of 3 years bond!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.44.73 (talk) 11:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not mention any of what you are talking about, so there is nothing to correct on that topic. Wikipedia is unlikely to report on a tw-year bond, unless it was for a famous person. It would not be suitable to mention one case like that in the article about the police that may have arrested a person. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on ACT Policing. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ACT_Policing&oldid=1197140605"