Wikipedia

Talk:Metropolitan Police/Archive 2

< Talk:Metropolitan Police
Latest comment: 1 year ago by 10mmsocket in topic Map is incorrect
Archive 1Archive 2

Racism /police violence

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Can I write an article on this?

I want to keep an eye on these cases as well:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7767834.stm

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jOItzVx2unpxr62FwrfQt3LGpIdA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jemthepen (talk • contribs) 16:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I support the addition of a section on police violence.93.96.148.42 (talk) 01:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


Yes, I think you should write an article on it. I find it very odd that there is no such section on this page, given the huge history of it within the MPS. Wikifrankicopter (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Controversies?

Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

I notice that National Black Police Association Boycott has been added to the list of Notable incidents and investigations. This section was/is intended to list notable accidents, disasters and crimes that involve MPS investigation, NOT internal disputes and politics within the MPS itself. (I should know, I was one of those who created and developed that section originally, along with Escaper7 if I remember rightly). The NBPA Boycott does not belong there. However, I agree that it's a notable internal issue (along with controversies over race within the force), so I suggest that the Notable Convictions section be made into a Notable Convictions and Controversies (or somesuch) and the NBPA Boycott be added there (perhaps as part of an appropriate (ie: balanced, NPOV) summary of the ongoing race concerns/issues involving the Met). Notable controversies involving the Met could include: race, use of firearms, public order control ('kettling'), etc. Any thoughts? - HTUK (talk) 04:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Surely there is a need for a 'Criticisms' or 'Controversies' section. The met have played a very controversial role in many recent events: Jean Charles de Menezes, the handling of the 2009 G-20 (kettling, Ian Tomlinson) and the 2010 student protests (arguments against their tactics as either too soft or too heavy-handed, Jody McIntyre), the News of the World phone hacking scandal... Also further back there have been controversies concerning suggested institutional Racism: Stephen Lawrence inquiry and the Brixton Riots. --86.27.155.40 (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


Why is there no controversies section? There's one a week in newspapers. For starts:

The Metropolitan Police Service has been plagued by allegations of corruption,[1] incompetence,[2] institutionalised racism[3][4] and violence,[5] as well as being involved in cover ups,[6] and selling sensitive information to tabloid newspapers.[7]
They are responsible for the shootings of several unarmed civillians. Harry Stanley, a decorator was shot at near point blank range while unarmed.[8] Jean Charles de Menezes, shot in the back of the head 7 times while boarding the underground,[9] and Mark Duggan, the shooting of whom which sparked nationwide riots.[10] The Metropolitan Police also shot and paralysed Cherry Groce, a mother-of-six, while searching for her son, sparking the Brixton riots.[11]
The Met are accused of several brutal beatings and are responsible for more deaths in police custody than any other police force.[12]They have been accused of thuggish behaviour against civilians, such as assaulting an innocent newspaper vendor, resulting in his death. [13]And have been accused of purposeful mismanagement of cases in order to cover up racist attacks and police brutality. [14]

[15]

The Metropolitan police have been exposed for sending an undercover officer to smear the friends and family of Stephen Lawrence, an 18 year old murdered in a racist attack. [16] Undercover Metropolitan Police have also been exposed for tricking innocent women into sexual relationships, and even fathering children as a means to further their credibility. [17][18]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.68.251.43 (talk) 14:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

This is a fair starting point for some possible holes in the article, but criticism sections aren't always appropriate and there is some clear repetition of facts already listed in the "Notable incidents and investigations" section here. It seems better to mention these things in context (as with the existing concealed shoulder identification numbers controversy in the "Ranks" section) rather than raking them all into one section which the reader might miss. --McGeddon (talk) 19:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I tend to agree with you, but I also feel like if the various controversies were added to additional sections that they would become cluttered. Do you think it's better to include the controversies in the various other sections? I also agree that the controversies section was poor tone, but that doesn't mean there's not a need for the section, just that it should be written in a more neutral manner.Wikifrankicopter (talk) 21:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC) Wikifrankicopter (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

They also killed the guy on top of the roof of Beak Street in 2012, yet hardly any news sources reported it. Unless the murderers in uniform were actually members of the armed forces inpersonating police officers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.241.190.125 (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Notable cases.

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Not sure if the OP is aware, but it was not until the 1960's that all English Police forces had specialist branches such as a "Murder Squad", and consequently many high profile crimes in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and even some Commonwealth countries saw Scotland Yard detectives called in to take over these investigations. There are numerous cases that spring to mind that were very famous in their day, including the murder of Patricia Curran (N.Ireland), Constance Kent (Somerset), Great Train Robbery (Buckinghamshire) Harry Oakes (Bahamas). I can't say about the Great Train Robbery, but as far as murder cases were concerned, there was an established principal, that if Scotland Yard were called in, they paid 50% of the cost of the investigation, and the local force paid the rest. I think it is worth mentioning the broader role of the MET in historic cases such as those mentioned above, and as I said, there were many others.46.7.85.68 (talk) 12:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Metropolitan Police Service. 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 04:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Metropolitan Police Service. 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 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Met Police Driving School (Hendon)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think the Police Driving School at Hendon is worth adding to this article, as it is were all UK driving standards and the Highway Code is derived — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.168.154 (talk) 16:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Metropolitan 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) 16:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

https://uk.axon.com/products/body-2

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

american police forces use them extensively

86.141.205.9 (talk) 01:26, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Highlights from the Met's Statement of Accounts

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

If anyone is interested, you can see the numbers of police officers and staff who earned more than £50,000 in 2014/15, in £5k segments. The total number is 9,224, which is out of a total employee number of about 44,000. Plus you can see what named officers who were on more than £150,000 got. For example, Bernard Hogan-Howe was on £275,000. Statement of Accounts 2014/15. Kookiethebird (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

How the heck did he earn 250 grand! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.178.163.208 (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Metropolitan 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, 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) 11:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Metropolitan 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, 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) 06:16, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Metropolitan 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, 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) 03:34, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Metropolitan 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, 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) 08:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Metropolitan 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, 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) 00:13, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I think there should be a new Wikipedia article on “Constituting instruments” of legislation

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

..... due to the fact that this article introduces the term and mentions several Acts of Parliament but doesn't explain what a Constituting Instrument is. Would a legal expert be willing to help? Adrian816 (talk) 11:20, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

National Responsibilities of the Met

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The point at issue around the reverts today is, what are the national responsibilities of the Met. The Met has some unique national responsibilities such as protection of Royalty and co-ordination / lead on counter terrorism policing amongst a few others. What this means in reality is that Met officers are serving in different parts of the country in their normal duties far away from the Metropolitan Police District, the police area of the Met. So for example, in terms of Royalty protection, Met officers protect palaces used by he Royals regardless of where they are geographically located. If you visit Windsor Castle or Balmoral, the officers responsible for policing the palaces (and their grounds) & maintaining physical security are Met officers despite the fact that Windsor is in Thames Valley Police area and Balmoral is in Police Scotland police area. A clear national responsibility for the Met.

An anon editor has today tried to add, protection of embassies as a further national responsibility. This is incorrect. The Met is not responsible nationally for protecting embassies. It just so happens that all embassies are geographically located in the MPD so the responibility falls to the Met - but this is not the same thing as saying it is a national responsibility as per above. If an embassy was to be set up in Manchester, the Met would not be responsible for protecting it - Greater Manchester Police would.

The Met has many unique responsibilities, some of which, such as Royalty Protection & CT policing are national responsibilities - meaning the Met lead and deploy on these matters regardless of where they are in the country. Other unique responsibilities, such as protecting embassies, dealing with far more protests than any other force or policing the largest airport in the country are not national but merely because they are located in the police force area of the Met, the Metropolitan Police District. I have edited the article to try and make this clearer Bowchaser (talk) 20:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Hatnote

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Article hatnote needs changing following the page move. Whizz40 (talk) 12:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 3 May 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago14 comments10 people in discussion
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Renamed. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


Metropolitan Police Service → Metropolitan Police – Although its official name is now the Metropolitan Police Service, its common name is still overwhelmingly the Metropolitan Police, which redirects here. For most of its history it was only known as the Metropolitan Police (MPS is a recent innovation). Its own logo and website calls it the Metropolitan Police. Its Twitter page mostly calls it the Metropolitan Police. It is almost always called the Metropolitan Police in the British media, including such outlets as the BBC. No, it isn't the only force in the world called the Metropolitan Police (although it probably is the only force that only uses that name without a city identifier), but it is the clear primary topic for that name, as one of the oldest and most famous police forces in the world which was the prototype of full-service civil policing. It should clearly be renamed per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OFFICIALNAME and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Support, per WP:COMMONNAME; Metropolitan Police clearly dominates common usage so this seems obvious. wjematherplease leave a message... 14:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Support as above. --truflip99 (talk) 03:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Neutral, however, whilst we're at it, I think the article titled Metropolitan police is probably a good candidate for deletion. It's mostly a list of police forces, and with only one reference it doesn't seem to be of any value. The content should be moved to Municipal police. Elshad (talk) 09:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
It should be kept, but only as a disambiguation page for forces with "Metropolitan Police" in their names. Probably renamed to Metropolitan Police (disambiguation). -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
That makes sense. Elshad (talk) 13:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Revealed: the grim list of sex abuse claims against the Metropolitan Police

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Not sure how to include this information

John Cummings (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

"Richard Okorogheye" listed at Redirects for discussion

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Richard Okorogheye. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 19#Richard Okorogheye until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 18:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect picture of Met Police helmet

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Hello,

We need to consider removing the picture of the Metropolitan Police helmet. The Met's helmets have only ever featured a black band above the peak, rather than a silver one. The one in the picture, although most people would not know it, is incorrect and is presumably one which has just had a Met Badge added as they have never had a silver band, only a black one.

--2A00:23C6:938A:B101:B1FA:521F:7E8B:85E4 (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Google images would suggest that you are correct. I have reverted the image change. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
@Canley: You may wish to comment on the photo and the comments above? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Search Google Images for "metropolitan police constable" and where a custodian helmet is show it has a black band. Alamy stock image search shows the same thing. PC on Met's own website has black band. Twitter picture from this month of Police Commissioner with three constables in black band helmet. Those are just a few easily found examples. --10mmsocket (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Flickr image 2015, Flickr image 2014, Flickr image 2008 - all images have wiki-compatible licences. All show black band. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
And quite a few at Commons:Category:Police officers of the Metropolitan Police Service. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Commons? Never heard of it! 10mmsocket (talk) 19:15, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
I took the photo, can't guarantee it's genuine but it did have a Met crest/badge when I got it. I thought it was a film/TV prop but it does seem to have a PC's name and number written on a tag, not necessarily from the Met though. I note The Guardian frequently uses this Larry Lilac/Alamy photo with what appears to be a silver-banded helmet (but could be a mockup), and inspectors have two silver bands, however agree PCs had black banded helmets as far back as I can determine (1960s). The helmet in the photo is pretty old, so not sure if the black coating could have worn off? Feel free to remove it and replace with a more contemporary one in use as suggested. --Canley (talk) 04:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Clapham Common vigil

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@RobinHammon: I reverted your addition because it is massively disproportionate to this article (see WP:UNDUE and WP:Recentism). The event merits inclusion, but the appropriate weight in this article is a couple of sentences at most. The article is currently 2,400 words on a world famous organisation with nearly 200 years of history that includes events of much greater significance (ie events about which entire books have been written), but your addition was nearly 500 words (20% of the current article size), which is completely disproportionate. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Agree completely with your action and rationale 10mmsocket (talk) 14:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

History of the Metropolitan Police

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The history article needs a lot of work. Jim Michael (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Ranks

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It's absurd to have the special constabulary ranks going the other way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.153.6 (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Some may question why this article is of interest to WikiProject Crime and WikiProject British crime. According to the Peelian principles, which originate from the "General instructions" of the Metropolitan Police in 1829, the role of the Police is "to prevent crime and disorder" and "the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder". This crime prevention aspect of policing appears to be outside the scope of WikiProject Law Enforcement, which is why this article is "of interest" to all three of the aforementioned WikiProjects appearing in the banners above. Please remember that the purpose of WikiProjects is to improve the quality of Wikipedia articles, so WikiProjects ought to be inclusive, not exclusive. If you disagree with including all these WikiProject banners, please discuss and explain why you think this article is not "of interest" to the WikiProject concerned if you intend to remove any of these WikiProject banners. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 21:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Overlap between the ‘Controversies’ section of this article and History of the Metropolitan Police

Latest comment: 2 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The ‘Controversies’ section of this article is incomplete, (for instance, it does not mention Blair Peach, Stephen Waldorf, Stephen Lawrence, or Mark Duggan). It also overlaps with the article on the History of the Metropolitan Police.

Are there any suggestions as to how this should be handled? Sweet6970 (talk) 13:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Move it all to the history article. 10mmsocket (talk) 13:11, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
That is my instinct as an editor. But as a reader, I would not look at the History article to check information on, for instance, Child Q, because I would expect the History article to be about Sir Robert Peel and suchlike. Do you have any suggestions as to how to make it clear to both readers and editors that inf on current controversies should go on the History article? Sweet6970 (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Anything that's controversial has already happened and therefore it's history. Current controversies should be covered by WP:NOTNEWS. TBH I think the recently added strip search section is borderline not worthy of going the article when compared with the other big stories that have been covered w.r.t. the force. That doesn't directly answer your question - so even if it's current it should be in the history article. 10mmsocket (talk) 14:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

see above yes 120.21.222.76 (talk) 09:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

All British police forces will have to change eventually (the royal cypher is on most of their cap badges and helmet plates). But not yet, as that would be a huge change to just do overnight. Wikipedia reflects reality. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

New 'Badge'

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The new 'badge' logo that has been added to this page isn't a crest actually used by the Met. I can see the actual crest was listed as a reference for that work, however this new replacement for what was initially used as the badge isn't at all correct. Case for reverting? Johntalk 20:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Interesting challenge. Do you have a diff for when the badge was added so we can see the previous state of the article? 10mmsocket (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
The badge was added as of diff 1127392419[19]. The Met have never actually issued a coloured version of their crest in vector format, however do use a plain coloured version regularly, see [20], [21] or [22]. This matches the crest used in the Met's flag [23]. It could be beneficial to replace the crest in question with the black version from that first external ref, or to simply remove it entirely and maintain the corporate logo and flag which displays the crest. Johntalk 10:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hatnote

Latest comment: 1 year ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Hatnote was changed.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There are many departments known as the "Metropolitan police", and I don't see why the police in DC are worthy of being mentioned above all others, especially considering the Dhaka Metropolitan Police and Las Vegas Metropolitan Police have larger forces and cover a more populous area. I think the most geographically balanced thing to do would be to not mention any other departments by name. –DMartin 16:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I had no idea there were so many departments until I looked in Metropolitan Police (disambiguation). I support your assertion that it doesn't make sense to highlight just one department in the hatnote. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly about this. Certainly not strong enough to revert again if my revert is reverted. But it's not so much about the areas they cover but the name of the police force. The DC police are reasonably widely known as the Metropolitan Police (Department) and it seems likely to me that somebody might land at an article titled "Metropolitan Police" and expect to read about policing in DC, not London. It seems less likely that anyone looking for one of the other police forces listed on the disambiguation would expect to arrive at this title and read an article about (for example) the police in Dhaka. I'm sure there's a tool somewhere that tells us what readers click on, but I don't know where. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and edited the hatnote. I'm very much on team "hatnotes should be as succint as possible", but if someone wants to expand it I wouldn't be opposed to that. I'm honestly starting to wonder if this page should be moved to Metropolitan Police (London) and the disambiguation moved to this title, but I'm fine to leave well enough alone for now (at least until I do more research). –DMartin 17:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't think there's enough ambiguity that a move is necessary. Though while we're on the subject, I don't think we need the City of London Police in the hatnote. It's much more likely, in my opinion, that a reader would expect the CoLP to cover the whole of London than expect the Met to cover the City. And the difference is discussed in the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:48, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I would support that, although I'm a Brit, this isn't British Wikipedia (but of course we invented most of the things on here) 10mmsocket (talk) 17:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Map is incorrect

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The map of the Met's jurisdiction incorrectly includes the City of London, which is actually the area of the distinct City of London Police force. Someone who knows how to do these things should change it. 92.18.239.84 (talk) 11:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

So what would you suggest? The City of London territory is an enclave within the Met territory. On a map the size of the one in the article's infobox, if the City of London territory were blanked out it would render a just a couple of pixels - essentially invisible - until the map was clicked up on to expand it. Thus I don't see it as a massive issue. 10mmsocket (talk) 12:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Metropolitan_Police/Archive_2&oldid=1212759553"