Jump to content

Talk:Queensland Police Service

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

Typo in template?

[edit]

How come it says "General Employeess" in "Organisational structure"? Is that a typo in the template? Where do the 2 esses come from? 220.253.128.176 (talk) 01:18, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Queensland Police Service New Logo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Queensland Police Service New Logo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Flag of the Queensland Police Service.svg

[edit]

The file File:Flag of the Queensland Police Service.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Flag of the Queensland Police Service.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 06:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Badge of the Queensland Police Service.svg

[edit]

The file File:Badge of the Queensland Police Service.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Badge of the Queensland Police Service.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 06:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 February 2015

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 57 13:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Queensland Police → Queensland Police Service – I propose that this article be renamed from "Queensland Police" to the official title of "Queensland Police Service". The title is listed as "Queensland Police Service" on their website, even images such as flags and symbols of the QPS are named with "Service" on the end, not just "Queensland Police". Support? Nick Mitchell 98 (talk) 03:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Lewis

[edit]

This is a list of people who have held a particular role, not a time-specific past mention in a biographical article. Wikipedia:Verifiability is not a negotiable policy, so please provide one reference that Terry Lewis has a current knighthood if you wish to add that claim to the article.

I find it bewildering that someone would be insistent on adding to the article something which is verifiably and inarguably false, and this bizarre, new, unilateral attempt to redefine the whole list in a way that no casual reader would ever interpret it for the purposes of referring to somebody with a title they do not possess needs a consensus. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Drover's Wife. First of all, by continuing to edit the article prior to discussion and consensus, you are acting in bad faith and edit warring. I ask that you please calm down, assume good faith and rationally listen to other editors' opinions. That said, this is not at all a verifiability issue – it is recorded that Lewis held a knighthood and other honours at the time he was commissioner. I must say, I agree with Nford24's views on this. The list of commissioners in this article should reflect the individuals as at the time they held the position, which is what this article has done for several years as far as I can tell. This is consistent with other lists of Australian office holders, such as those in Chief of the Defence Force (Australia), Chief of Army (Australia), and List of governors-general of Australia, along with various others in similar train. It would be quite incorrect, for instance, to record Peter Cosgrove as "General the Honourable Sir Peter Cosgrove AK, MC" in the Chief of Army article, as this would not at all reflect the reality as at the time he was CA – i.e. what the list specifically concerns. It would, therefore, be correct to list Lewis' knighthood in this article. That said, a note should be added to Lewis' entry noting that he was later stripped of his honours (aside from the GM – which, oddly, has also been removed from the list). Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is a verifiability issue, because the article flat-out stated he had an honour he does not possess, and that is a claim that needs to be backed up.
A reasonable person reading a list is going to assume that Wikipedia is correctly recounting details of the honours that person does, in fact, possess. And the present mention of Peter Cosgrove in that list would be exactly correct: he does possess those honours, and not mentioning honours he has picked up since leaving office adds clarity to the article by not implying he had them when he didn't. This is the opposite of the situation with Lewis: he does not possess the honours you want the article to claim he does possess, and it makes our article flat-out false to claim he holds something he hasn't had in over 20 years. One of those lists is uncontentious; the other is a blatant violation of fundamental verifability policy. I have no problem with a footnote to Lewis's entry that mentions in the footnote that he was once knighted, but I will not stand for people adding information they know to be false to Wikipedia lists. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Drover's Wife Keep the conversation here please. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 02:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Queensland Police Service/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Just letting you know the QPS have now rolled out tasers.

Here is the link, http://www.police.qld.gov.au/News+and+Alerts/campaigns/taser/default.htm but i have no clue how to add this information to the article.

Cheers fellas 220.245.97.123 (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 13:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 03:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queensland Police Service. 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}}).

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) 22:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Lewis

[edit]

Instead of edit warring, could we possibly resolve this issue about Terry Lewis by one of two solutions.

1. removing all titles and awards from the commissioner's table and just simply list their names and dates. Let people click through to read the full story about each commissioner. The Terry Lewis story is not a simple one that the user is likely to intuit by either including or excluding of titles/awards in this table.

2. keep all the titles/awards for everyone and add in parenthesis for Terry Lewis that he was subsequently stripped of them

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with the facts of the matter, just how to best present it to the reader. Kerry (talk) 15:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1 is fine by me. I'm not much of a fan of 2 - he's not entitled to be referred to as "Sir Terry Lewis", so we shouldn't be doing that. The Drover's Wife (talk) 20:32, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm perfectly fine with both options, however we've been down this road before. Terry Lewis's knighthood was reverted after his removal from the post. It's historically inaccurate not to state his knighthood. Also, his George Medal (GM) keeps being removed as well, that award was never reverted. Our job is not to rewrite history but to state it as accurately as possible.
I implemented the second one, because partly because it seemed unfair to the other commissioners to remove their awards here (noting that many do not have articles to mention their awards there) and partly because I think to show him as a "stripped Sir" better reflects reality and shows he's a worse guy than the commissioners who were not made Sir in the first place. Can we all live with this? Kerry (talk) 08:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It looks ugly as sin, but it addresses the problem, albeit in a bit of a peculiar way. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to remove two sections

[edit]

Hi! I propose to remove the Queensland Police Service#Former members and Queensland Police Service#Queensland police killed in the line of duty sections. They're both missing the vast majority of people for both, and the former members section is somewhat irrelevant to the general public in the purview of the service as a police force. ItsPugle (talk) 03:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on both counts. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The addition of the Queensland Police Service#Queensland police killed in the line of duty section to the page is quite reasonable and I don't see the need to remove it at all. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 02:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nford24: 124 officers have been killed while on duty (See the Queensland Police Memorial), so it's not practical to list every officer (just as not every family may want the death of their loved one smeared across the internet on the world's largest encyclopedia). Even the content as it is, with just a third of the people listed, is really not reader friendly; it's just a huge list of dates, the incident, and officer names. ItsPugle (talk) 02:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The list of the killed in the line of duty is complete as far as I am aware as it came from the Role of Honour as cited. I think the criteria of death in the line of duty distinguishes it from the police memorial (my suspicion looking at a few examples seems to be death in road accidents). But I am not sure of the exact difference, but it is the police's distinction, not mine. I could move the list into the History of the Queensland Police or into its own article. Ditto the list of commissioners and the former members, and keep this article more focussed on the current police service. As an aside, being incomplete or even being unable to be completed, is not an argument for deleting something (or we'd be deleting most of Wikipedia). Wikipedia is always a work in progress. We achieve more by adding content than deleting it (other than content which is not permitted, of course). Kerry (talk) 15:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's all a bit murky. The Police Memorial that I linked says that they all died on duty, so I kinda of perceive them as dying in the line of duty (most of the road accident stuff seems to be while they were pulling people over etc and they were hit), but even then, the Role of Honour is no longer public (I'm guessing due to the QPS' new website). ItsPugle (talk) 01:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why has the former members section already disappeared? Kerry (talk) 15:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we have it? Other states don't have this random tiny list of some people with articles who have served in the police. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we have Notable residents in place articles and Notable alumni in university articles etc? It's just a specialised form of "See Also"? Kerry (talk) 01:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Having said that, I am personally indifferent to the former members list. But I don't think the principle is any different to the notable residents, etc. Kerry (talk) 01:11, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Kerry.Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 00:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Caretaker acting commissioners to be listed?

[edit]

Ron REDMOND was relieving commissioner during the Fitzgerald Inquiry for a substantial period of time, and when the position had not been advertised. Should GOLLSCHEWSKI be listed in the commissioner list when just acting in the role?—Q8682 (talk) 12:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Queensland_Police_Service&oldid=1211414129"