Talk:Chicago Police Department/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Chicago Police Department. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Can we please have some balance and NPOV

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am more than a little concerned by the editorial bias and lack of neutrality in this article. Since 1853 over five hundred Chicago police officers have died in the course of their work, over three hundred of them shot, five bomb victims, three stabbing victims and others. Not one of these officers gets mentioned in the article by name and the only mention that police officers die protecting the public is two brief sentences totalling thirty five words and that their stars are mounted in Police Headquarters.
By contrast, incidents where officers have exceeded their authority are given several paragraphs each, detailed explanations of what is alleged to have happened, amounts of compensation paid out, and in one story there is a quote that is more than four times longer than the entire section on police deaths in the service of the community. This disparity is highly indicative of a lack of balance in the article but is unfortunately not restricted to the length of the pieces.
The Summerdale Scandals piece is un-sourced, except for a quote the article attributes to the New York Times, Feb-22-1960, but which was actually taken from an online book called, "United States Demographics - Part B", the author of which is given as "Wikipedians". So that's Wikipedia quoting itself as a source for itself and the quote actually says nothing at all about the supposed Summerdale Scandal but just says that a criminologist was brought in to modernise the department. Incidentally, we know the source is the book and not the newspaper itself because the date is wrong. The article appeared on p. 1 of the New York Times on 23-Feb-1960, but carries the dateline Feb-22 because that is the date on which the event occurred. The correct way to attribute sources is by the date of the newspaper you are quoting but the article simply copies the mistake from the book which, since it was written by Wikipedians is itself simply quoting Wikipedia here, here, and here.
The other source for this segment is to the papers of the aforementioned Criminologist where it just says the department was, "rocked with graft and incompetence" and that he retired in 1967. Therefore, the whole text about alleged burglary rings, eight officers accused, the biggest police-related scandal in the city etc is entirely un-sourced but this un-sourced allegation that is not sufficiently notable to have an article of its own somehow gets three times more attention than more than five hundred officers who died in the line of duty.
The Black Panther Raid piece is a word for word quote from here, which is copyright the Chicago Historical Society and will need to be re-written or paraphrased from the article on Fred Hampton.
The Ryan Harris murder piece is clearly wrong when it says, "Durr pled guilty to the rape of Harris, but never admitted to her murder" since the source it links is titled, "Sex Offender Admits To 1998 Murder" and the very first line in the source says, "A convicted sex offender pleaded guilty Monday to the 1998 murder of an 11-year-old girl..." which must beg the question whether the editor even read the source he was quoting.Cottonshirt τ 14:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. This article (as it still stands, almost three years after the above comment), is a travesty. NPOV has yet to be restored. A huge section and portion of the article is of negativity unbalanced by anything else, as mentioned above. The article subsection, "Controversies and brutality" should be spun-off into its own article. It certainly shouldn't remain in its present form. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 12:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Nonsense. The controversies section barely scratches the surface of the widespread brutality, rapes, assaults, frauds and other crimes of the Chicago PD which has cost over half a billion dollars in lawsuits in just one decade [1]. If anything, this article lacks a NPOV that's wildly in favor of the CPD, with any mention of their widespread corruption and brutality being buried more than halfway done the page, when it should be in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.238.40 (talk) 14:06, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Founding year

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Cmmcnam2 posted to Main Page/Errors saying that according to the Chicago Police's own site the department was founded in 1835, not 1837. I'm noting this here and removing it there; original post is here. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

The Guardian’s Homan Square story was huge on the internet—but not in Chicago media

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

FYI: http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/guardian_homan_square_chicago_media.php Ottawahitech (talk) 19:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Aggregate costs of lawsuits

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I don't see these figures anywhere in the artice. It would put the individual dollar figures into perspective.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/10/01/u-s-cities-pay-out-millions-to-settle-police-lawsuits/
U.S. cities pay out millions to settle police lawsuits
By Radley Balko
October 1, 2014
The Chicago Sun-Times reported earlier this year that the city has payed out nearly half a billion dollars in settlements over the past decade, and spent $84.6 million in fees, settlements, and awards last year. The Chicago Police Department is about three times the size of the Baltimore PD. Chicago the city has about four times as many people as Baltimore. Crunch those numbers as you wish. Bloomberg News reported that in 2011, Los Angeles paid out $54 million, while New York paid out a whopping $735 million, although those figures include negligence and other claims unrelated to police abuse. Oakland Police Beat reported in April that the city had paid out $74 million to settle 417 lawsuits since 1990. That’s a little more than $3 million per year. The Denver Post reported in August that the Mile High City paid $13 million over 10 years. The Dallas Morning News reported in May that the city has forked over $6 million since 2011. And last month, Minneapolis Public Radio put that city’s payout at $21 million since 2003.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/?p=167182
City pays heavy price for police brutality
By Andy Shaw
04/14/2014
Brutality-related lawsuits have cost Chicago taxpayers $521 million over the last decade — that’s more than half a billion dollars — and Burge’s team accounts only for about 15 percent of that staggering figure. In 2013 alone, the city paid out $84.6 million in settlements, judgments, legal fees and other expenses, more than triple the budgeted amount.

--Nbauman (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Chicago Police Department. 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC)