Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized crime

Add topic
Active discussions
WikiProject Organized crime (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Organized crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organized crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
NA This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Project templateEdit

Hi Northamerica1000, I created a template for the project. {{WikiProject Organized Crime}}, but it is currently not working properly. Can you help me with it? Also, we will need a photo for this template, and the same for userbox. Thanks. :-) —usernamekiran(talk) 21:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

I formatted the parameters for the template today. A photo may not be the way to go, because it may lend undue weight toward a particular topic. A project logo is the better way to go, in my opinion. North America1000 21:58, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
What kind of logo do you have in mind, and how would we create it? Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 22:52, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Using an existent logo-type image would be easiest. Perhaps something from Category:Balanced scales of justice at Commons, such as the example below. I think this example would work out, as it's rather simple. North America1000 23:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't know...I don't think it really fits. I like the abstract idea, but I still need to think. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 02:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: We never agreed on the image for the userbox or the info box. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 03:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vaselineeeeeeee: I saw it being used on the project and thought the image was decided through a consensus. I apologise. Please feel free to remove the image temporarily till another image is formally accepted. :-)
usernamekiran(talk) 03:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
I really don't see how the scale relates. How about something like this? The image is free. I think it's a pretty cool silhouette, and the majority of organized crime involve weapons. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 04:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
yup. I find it cool. But is wikipedia fine with using a firearm's photo? Also, I would prefer a tommy gun  usernamekiran(talk) 04:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
@Vaselineeeeeeee: i think the image is of tommy gun. But are you sure it is free for use? —usernamekiran(talk) 04:32, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
I think so, on Google it's under "images for reuse and modification". Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 04:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
yup. It says "CC0 Public Domain, Free for commercial use, No attribution required". I will upload it to commons. —usernamekiran(talk) 04:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Done. —usernamekiran(talk) 05:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Organized crime includes terrorism and terrorist groups and organizations nowadays. As such, I'm uncomfortable using an image of a firearm as the project logo, particularly since a project image would be used on the project's banner that goes on article talk pages. North America1000 06:06, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Categories for botEdit

@Northamerica1000: erm... what does mean by recursive category? Can you give me an example please? I can start working on it then. —usernamekiran(talk) 22:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: User:BU Rob13 meant that pages in subcategories and sub-subcategories of those will need to be listed separately, in one long list, and that the bot cannot go through the categories using a category tree. So, we have to list everything here manually. I'm trying to keep it in a sort of topical and/or alphabetical order. North America1000 22:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000: I think I understood it now. I will start working on after 12 hours from now. :)
I missed your ping. Sorry. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:27, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000 and Usernamekiran: Yes, so basically, say Category A contains Category B which contains Category C. You want everything in the tree tagged. You would need to add each of Categories A, B, and C to your list of categories. This is to prevent mistakes. If you go deep enough down a category tree, there is almost always pages unrelated to the top category. ~ Rob13Talk 14:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Understood. :)
usernamekiran(talk) 00:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: Hi. I have started to work on Category:Organizations designated as terrorist in Asia‎, but I am going offline soon. I will be out of town for a few days (2-3 days I think, but the stay might increase). I will not have access to any computer during this period (but I might edit through phone). I will work on that particular category once I get back. Sorry for the inconvenience. Best, —usernamekiran(talk) 21:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

A check is requestedEdit

@Northamerica1000: Hi,
I listed some categories for bot. special:diff/792166564. Would you please tell me if I did it correctly? If I did, then I continue the task in same manner. If there is something that needs to be changed/done differently, kindly let me know. —usernamekiran(talk) 21:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: Looks good, and I noticed that you also included the relevant subcategories of initial subcategories. Yes, this is how to do it. North America1000 17:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Talkpage banner addition using AWBEdit

While the categories are being worked out I, [usernamekiran(talk)], am also adding the banner using AWB, in addition to sorting out the categories as originally discussed.
So far, the banner has been added to the articles of following categories (excluding their subcategories):

Entire categoriesEdit

Following categories have been tagged with AWB's "recursive" option:

  • Category:Gangs: around 14,000 articles remaining. (tagging average:400 articles per day)

Defining "organised crime"Edit

I have been tagging articles with project banner. For now, I am excluding fiction categories (sopranos, godfather and similar). But I am tagging non-fiction books (biographies, or studies) related to organised crime.

While tagging the articles, I came across some crime incidents which were perpetrated by a group, or "gang" but were more like "one time event". These include mob lynching, gang rapes, incidents of angry mob leading to riots, or mass robbing and so on. I am not sure if these crimes can be considered as "organised crime". As far as I am aware, Indian Penal Code has a few definitions, the most rudimentary being: "[...]those involved, normally working with others, in continuing serious criminal activities".
That is, more than one instance of crime that was pre-planned (pre-organised?) is required to call a group as a "criminal group/gang" or "crime syndicate" (I think, as per the legal definitions, a syndicate requires hierarchical structure).

Anyways, our point here is: I think we should not include one time events as "work of organised crime". But if the one time event is perpetrated by an already established criminal group, it can be considered as an activity of organised crime. I mean, if a gang of narco suppliers (who never do anything except trafficking drugs) gets high on their own drugs, and decide to rob a store out of munchies, and for fun; then we can call it incident of organised crime. But if the same happens with college students, then it should be passed off as an one time event. Kindly let me know what you guys think/what are your opinions? Regards, —usernamekiran(talk)

Apologies for mass ping @Everymorning, Anna Frodesiak, Madreterra, Walker in the Mist, Libertybison, and MX:usernamekiran(talk) 06:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I think we could see this from the point of view of visitors. What would they expect to be within the scope of 'organized crime'? I would say the dictionary definition. A bunch of college kids who organized themselves for a single evening of crime does not fit the definition. If it were many months and they wore fedoras, then yes, maybe. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:44, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the ping. One thing I want to bring up is that one-time events can be considered works of organized crime if the investigation points in that direction, notwithstanding if the case has a verdict or not (since organized crime sensitives are poorly investigation/rarely receive attention for court in many parts of the world, I don't think a verdict should be our rule of thumb). Take a look at the Murder of Vicente Bermúdez Zacarías, for example. The case is unsolved, and "officially" there were only 2 participants involved. But the nature of the attack (a professional assassin who knew the guy's schedule/location, the person's profession, along with what investigators suspect, etc.), points to an organized crime attack. So to summarize, if the investigation or suspicions of a single-event fall on organized crime, I think we should include it. MX () 15:32, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Forgot to mention. But in Mexico at least, authorities look at certain signs to determine if a single-event attack was perpetrated by organized crime: type of weapons used, who did they target, the logistics (i.e. did they attack in a group, was it drive-by, did it seem "planned" by experts), was the victim tortured (and how was he/she tortured), did they steal any possessions, where did the attack take place, etc. I know I'm making this more complicated, but sometimes it's important to analyze single-event attacks case-by-case (and with the point above, determine if reliable sources suggest organized crime involvement). MX () 15:40, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Organized crime is synonymous with "racketeering". That requires more than one criminal act and implicitly more than one person. So that definition would include say the Luftansa heist, but exclude the Looting that goes on after a natural disaster, so long as you consider the act of looting as a single act, and not a series of acts. It could include a lynching, if for instance, the people who were doing the lynching did so more than once, and if it was the same people doing it. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
ordinarily, when you're trying to Define crime, you'd look to the laws. The problem with this is that the laws are designed convicted individuals, so in the RICO statute, for instance, there is no definition of organized crime or criminal organization. Instead, it simply talks about conspiring or racketeering Enterprises things like that. I think the simplest way to define organized crime is racketeering. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 16:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Under federal law:
I also think one should keep in mind the "conspiracy" element in organized crime. Organized crime has a popular definition and racketeering includes other one-time crimes, say a scam company. So I don't think they're equivalent. Most if not all of organized crime can be considered racketeering, but not all racketeering is organized crime. Libertybison (talk) 22:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Defining organized crime is a seriously contentious issue, and there is no single universally agreed upon definition. There is an academic who keeps a running tally of all the definitions he has seen used, and as of today, there are more than 200: Safest way to do this is to use the approach of the UN Transnational Organized Crime Convention, which describes a criminal group, rather than the act:

"“Organized criminal group” shall mean a structured group of three or more persons, existing for a period of time and acting in concert with the aim of committing one or more serious crimes or offences established in accordance with this Convention, in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit;"[1]

They then use a definition of a "serious crime", as the offence.

I'd definitely agree with Libertybison that you can't equate to racketeering though. And racketeering itself isn't a term that is used either operationally or in policy circles anymore.

Anyway, it's a fun topic to debate. Ciao! TOC24 (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

It's a sliding scale with more and more organization. Two people = a bit of organization. A street gang is more organized. Something like the Mafia is highly organized. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


@Northamerica1000 and Koavf: Hi. Since last 2-3 days I ran a few categories with recursive mode in AWB, but all of the pages under these cats were already tagged, as they were under some other category that was already worked upon. So the same pages are coming again n again under different categories. What should we do next?

On other note, I think we have tagged enough pages with project banner to begin with. What should be our next move to revive the project? —usernamekiran(talk) 18:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: happy to help but I'm not sure what you're saying. Can you please point to me some specific examples (talk pages, diffs, maybe a list you made with AWB)? As for revitalizing, that is a $64,000 question. I have some ideas but I'm not sure how practical any of them are... Can you tell me what you have in mind or what you've already done? ―Justin (koavf)TCM 21:18, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
@Koavf: Not much except tagging talkpages with wikiproject banner. But most of the tagged pages are highly relevant. I excluded the categories like "fictional mob bosses" or "films about organized crime". You can see more details at Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized crime/Bot tagging categories, Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized crime/Bot tagging categories/Sandbox 1, Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized crime/Bot tagging categories/Sandbox 2, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized crime/Bot tagging categories/Sandbox 3.
There are some editors who have shown interest to contribute to project, it can be seen on the project page. Also, I am aware of some editors who regularly contribute to the articles that come under the project's scope. Thats all for now. :-/
usernamekiran(talk) 12:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I think I see what you are saying now--you feel like you have tagged all of the appropriate talk pages for the time being (or at least a lot of them). Some recommendations that come to mind are posting to the talk page of relevant users, convincing The Signpost to cover you, offering a reward ($20?) for someone bringing a Top-level article to Featured status, going to forums about the topic and encouraging users there to become editors here, seeing if you can get someone who is teaching a course relevant to this topic to have a component of their class about editing Wikipedia... Some of these are more-or-less feasible but they all seem like they may be effective. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 03:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
@Koavf: 20 USD? OMG! Thats like around 734,000 Iranian Rials! I dont have that much Rials!
On a serious note, awarding real life money for wikipedia activity (except for the comptetions/events that are large-scale) is never a good idea, and is usually discouraged.
Now that I think about it, I should try to get hold of one rial. Or at the least I should see/touch one in real life. —usernamekiran(talk) 10:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran: Maybe, maybe not. But the reward could just be on the order of USD$20/TWD$600. E.g. donate that to a charity of the person's choosing. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 17:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
@Koavf: Hi. I apologise for the delayed reply. I typed the reply on the day when you replied, but somehow it didnt get saved. I thought it was. Sorry about that. Also, I was just kidding about the amount (I am from India, with Indian rupee. Yes, donating the money to charity of person's choosing is really a good idea. I dont know why but, it still feels a little odd to me. Maybe it is just personal, and nothing to do with wikipedia i think. Anyways, I am still working on the tagging thing. On a side note, I have applied for a BOT to be approved for that task. Lets see what happens with that. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:45, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

bot for adding project bannerEdit

Hello. I have opened a bot approval request; to add this wikiproject's banner to the articles that fall under the scope of this wikiproject. If you have any objection, suggestion on which articles should be excluded from tagging or which should be included kindly comment here, or at the discussion section of the bot approval page. The request, and the discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Usernamekiran BOT 2. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

2022 San Antonio trailer deaths listed at Requested movesEdit

A requested move discussion has been initiated for 2022 San Antonio trailer deaths to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 00:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Operation Black Swan listed at Requested movesEdit

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Operation Black Swan to be moved to 2016 recapture of El Chapo. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Philippine drug war listed at Requested movesEdit

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Philippine drug war to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:09, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Sicario (2015 film) listed at Requested movesEdit

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Sicario (2015 film) to be moved to Sicario. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.