Talk:Controversies of the Hong Kong Police Force

Scope
Not sure that this split from Hong Kong Police Force was a great idea. In general, we try to avoid "controversy" articles for neutrality reasons. Better to still cover the full scope in the main article and to break out individual points to their own sections/articles than to lop everything into a grand "controversies" article. (not watching, please )  czar  00:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, this could be merged to History of Hong Kong Police since these are historical events. Any argument here may similarly apply to the recently renamed Police misconduct allegations during the 2019 Hong Kong protests article. — MarkH21talk 00:25, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 24 December 2019

 * 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: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 05:29, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Controversies of the Hong Kong Police Force → Controversies and accused crimes of the Hong Kong Police Force – The listed items in the articles now not only records the controversies but also many severe accused crimes (e.g. Crimes against humanity such as San Uk Ling Holding Centre, arresting and beating up first aiders etc.) of the Hong Kong police. Besides, the revised article name would be in line with the Chinese article name. Many contents of this articles have been being translated from the Chinese version and thus the Chinese version could act as a standard to formalize the article contents. Elementautumn (talk) 04:00, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose: I don’t see why allegations needs to be part of the title, particularly when the specified ones are part of Police misconduct allegations during the 2019 Hong Kong protests. There’s also no need whatsoever to match other language wikis. — MarkH21talk 22:07, 24 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mention of being satirized
Being satirized on a satire show isn’t a measure of importance, which you claim. Coverage in reliable sources is how importance is typically measured on WP. The controversy is in the HKPF’s actions, not their response to a satire show. It’s undue prominence for a minor event relative to the greater controversies. — MarkH21talk 23:15, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * So? — MarkH21talk 22:52, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. The reason I insisted on keeping the satire show section is because the incident lead to a bigger controversy – the way how the force issued an official complaint letter to a public broadcaster – it's simply odd. That complaint lead to protests, email campaigns, and petitions against the force. There were also protests and online complaints against the broadcaster. This reflects another HKPF’s controversial action, other than stockpiling. That's why I believe it is worth mentioning. –Wefk423 (talk) 10:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Allegations of one officer's obstruction of justice
Again, content from is better suited for Police misconduct allegations during the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests. Here, we have a single officer that was arrested for allegations of obstructing justice. It's undue WP:PROMINENCE for an article about controversies of the entire Hong Kong Police Force (which has over 36,000 officers), throughout its history. Something like this article about the general trend of recent arrests of police officers is more appropriate.If we mentioned every allegation against a HK police officer from even the last 80 years, this article would be ridiculously unwieldy and violate Wikipedia's policy against being an indiscriminate collection of information. Also, please keep in mind that The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content (from the WP:ONUS policy), since you keep adding this disputed content back in. — MarkH21talk 10:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I have moved the content to Police misconduct allegations during the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests. Thank you for your suggestions JusticeforAll1989 (talk) 10:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC) JusticeforAll1989
 * I'd still point out that using the general trend article in the section at Police misconduct allegations during the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests, would still be more useful than the single allegation. A lone allegation doesn't seem so significant, but several do. — MarkH21talk 10:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)