Talk:List of paramilitary organizations
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of paramilitary organizations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 June 2023. The result of the discussion was keep. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the List_of_paramilitary_groups page were merged into List of paramilitary organizations on 22 February 2023. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Colectivo and National Youth Service
[edit]Comments by blocked sock hidden --IamNotU (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
AlJazeera - www.aljazeera.com/amp/features/2019/5/9/venezuela-who-are-the-colectivos BBC - www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-latin-america-47118139 Etc etc You're on slightly stronger ground with NYS but still Manchester uni - New York times - https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/28/world/reports-of-rape-and-torture-inside-zimbabwean-militia.html Etc etc Pipsally (talk) 16:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
|
Non-governmental paramilitary units
[edit]Should there perhaps be some set criteria for this section? Something like "this section includes the Boy Scouts, paintballers and historical battle re-enactment groups, but also terrorist groups, drug cartels, neo-nazis, white supremacists, anarchists, slave traders, pirates, sex-traffickers, La Cosa Nostra, the Bloods & Crips, left-and-right-wing hate groups, people who rob gas stations and wiki-vandalizing-sock-puppets"...? Just a thought - wolf 03:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Thewolfchild: Well, the Paramilitary article defines a paramilitary organization as
a semi-militarized force whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture, and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military, but is not formally part of a country's armed forces.
The problem is that it's not Wikipedia's job to determine whether a certain group fits this description or not. So maybe it would be best to simply require that every entry in the list comes with at least one reliable source that describes the group as a paramilitary organization. Or rather, to enforce this requirement, which obviously already exists as one of Wikipedia's core policies. Lennart97 (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)- Yes, obviously... we should ensure every entry is sourced. But more than that, it is our job to evaluate sources. Just because a source might denote a group a "paramilitary", doesn't mean that group fits the OED definition you noted above. So along with reliability of the source, we must ensure the entry as a whole (content + sourcing) complies with WP policies, since those take precedent.
Currently, there are about a dozen American groups listed, with only a single source attached; (an article about "anti-government" groups, which I'm not sure applies to all those groups.) Beyond that are another ≈3 dozen entries, all without a single source. All the entries, American and other, rely on linked WP articles, so scrutiny is needed. But ultimately, any challenged content requires consensus, and the wp:onus is on those seeking to include to achieve that consensus. - wolf 13:29, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. There's also List of paramilitary groups covering the same topic, by the way, which lists groups alphabetically regardless of whether they're governmental or not. I guess a merge is needed, but I don't know which way. Lennart97 (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- The other list is smaller, once the unsourced entries, duplicates and unneeded descriptions are stripped away, I believe that list could easily and boldly be merged into this one. (Entries can, and should, still be alphabetical, just by continent→ country→ group.) - wolf 14:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- I've done this merge and started a new discussion regarding another page with similar content. Hyponect (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- The other list is smaller, once the unsourced entries, duplicates and unneeded descriptions are stripped away, I believe that list could easily and boldly be merged into this one. (Entries can, and should, still be alphabetical, just by continent→ country→ group.) - wolf 14:13, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. There's also List of paramilitary groups covering the same topic, by the way, which lists groups alphabetically regardless of whether they're governmental or not. I guess a merge is needed, but I don't know which way. Lennart97 (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, obviously... we should ensure every entry is sourced. But more than that, it is our job to evaluate sources. Just because a source might denote a group a "paramilitary", doesn't mean that group fits the OED definition you noted above. So along with reliability of the source, we must ensure the entry as a whole (content + sourcing) complies with WP policies, since those take precedent.
Paramilitary Forces of India
[edit]India gives the designation of paramilitary to only one outfit,i.e. Assam Rifles.[1] They are under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs but are operationally under the control of the Ministry of Defense, officers from the Indian Army make up about 80% of the Assam Rifles Cadre. India does not consider the Central Reserve Police Force to be a paramilitary force. It has been designated as a Central Armed Police Force and comes under the purview of the Ministry of Home Affairs. CRPF has been incorrectly been classified as a paramilitary force, it has similar functions to one but has important differences, officially it is called a Central Armed Police Force. Notanikdey (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
References
Defunct organizations
[edit]List of defunct paramilitary organizations has similar scope to this article. Options:
- Change this to be an active organizations list and move defunct organizations to the other page.
- Merge that article into this one
Due to the length of the list I am leaning towards option 1. Hyponect (talk) 23:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- List-Class List articles
- Low-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles
- List-Class Crime-related articles
- Low-importance Crime-related articles
- List-Class Organized crime articles
- Low-importance Organized crime articles
- Organized crime task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- CL-Class military history articles
- CL-Class national militaries articles
- National militaries task force articles
- CL-Class Post-Cold War articles
- Post-Cold War task force articles
- List-Class organization articles
- Low-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles