Talk:Snow Leopard Commando Unit

Citations

It appears that some of the facts have been disputed and citation tags are being done and undone. From what I have read and included in my references when I first wrote this page, the first three disputed facts (cultural examination and equipment) ARE PROVEN in the Chinese language articles below. I believe that you were not able to find the relevant data in the English resources I included... I may have neglected to make citations directly from the text as they are in Chinese and this is an English wikipedia. Should we include citations from the Chinese text, or remove the citation tags since they were referenced already in the first place?

p.s. I may have taken liberties with the Hummer vehicle reference, as I wrote that fact in only because I have a photo evidence of such and had intended to paste it here... but as I do not know the copyright status of the picture, I cannot put it up now. Maybe if someone here would like to help? --Seng Yew 11:27, October 25, 2006 (UTC +8)

We should try to find sources in English, but more importantly when writting use in-line references so we know which cite goes with each claim, See WP:STYLE. Other than that this article is looking good. It's a great subject and one that, in my opinion, doesn't get enough attention. I would very much like to see the photos you speak of. Would the Chinese police have some sort of press office or public relations dept. from which to get press releases or photos? Cheers. L0b0t 03:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Will do so. :-) Regarding the Chinese Police P.R. Dept, I'm working on it... BTW If you want some photos I downloaded from various news websites you can request for my email thru my talk page. Also, here's an official English site link [1], note that it should be Snow Wolf Commando Unit, not Command as the phrase 突击队 translates into "Commandos". Maybe we can use the photos from that site? Cheers!~ --Seng Yew 19:55, October 25, 2006 (UTC +8)

edit: oh one more thing, you will have better luck googling the Chinese name of the SWCU if you are searching for resources. There's almost NOTHING in English! And chances are some sites may have confused the Beijing SWAT teams and SWCU with one another since BOTH units were performing maneuvres during the security demonstrations.

Posting of Photos

To all Special Forces and law enforcement enthusiasts: Note that this unit was shown to the public on only one occasion, and there has been cases of photos of PRC military Special Forces being mislabelled as being SWCU or SPU or vice versa. One of the reasons is that since both the SPU and SWCU are under the dirct command of the central government, they may shares some equipment and vehicles, causing even more confusion... and so, to ease the confusion on this matter, here's some suggestions on correctly identifying the various units:

• Almost all of the Special Police Units in the PRC have their uniform arm patches on their left arm, with a few units having them on both sides. Never on the right arm alone! There are some photoshopped pictures of foreign Asian Spec. Forces floating around claiming to be Spec. Ops from the PRC... so keep a proper look out
• The patch on the left arm identifies them as SPU (or SWAT, in Beijing's case), and the arm patch on the right side (if available) usually identifies them as police personnel (normal police arm patches)
• The ONLY exception to the rule is the SWCU, which puts its unit patch on the right arm. They are also easily identifiable from their distinct uniform layout.

Based on my observation, it appears that the Beijing SWAT team has been mis-identified as the SWCU and vice-versa in multiple video clips and photos during security demonstrations for the 2008 Olympics --Seng Yew 11:27, October 25, 2006 (UTC +8)

We all know what the PRC is

Will the editor who keeps inserting the irrelevant info about "the mainland", please knock it off. Unless you have a source that explicitly states that the this unit will not ever, under any circumstances, be used in the "special zones", you can't add that to the article. L0b0t 23:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Everything, except the constitutional document, diplomatic relations and national defense, is within the sole jurisdiction of the special administrative region concerned. Research on Wikipedia before putting on labels on anybody else. - Privacy 00:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

None of which is germane to this particular article. The article already states that this unit is tasked with the Peking Olympics, that would obviously NOT include Hong Kong, Shenzen, et al. L0b0t 00:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Moron... anyway Privacy, please STOP un-bolding the Chinese name! This is a common format with all the other pages with Chinese names, INCLUDING those with regards to Hong Kong! Thx --Seng Yew 13:07, October 29, 2006 (UTC +8)

edit: although the unit is known to be operating in the People's Armed Police, we don't know if they will actually respond to threats to the PRC within the S.A.R.s, so pls don't make un-sourced/non NPOV statements like the ones u made earlier. --Seng Yew 21:45, October 30, 2006 (UTC +8)

They never do, and they never can. - Privacy 21:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The People's Liberation Army is garrisoned in both the SARs. The garrison and its members must obey all SAR laws as well as national laws applicable to them. They do not participate in the governance of the SAR but the SAR may send for them in times of emergency such as natural disasters. According to the basic laws, defence is the responsibility of the Central People's Government. There is no law providing for enrollment of Hong Kong and Macau residents in the forces during ordinary times, and no Hong Kong and Macau residents are currently enrolled.

Maybe you should do some proper research before actually writing anything, what will stop the SARs from requesting help from the mainland anyway? Besides, two different countries can easily have both their Counter-terrorist teams work together (see Operation Feuerzauber in GSG-9) --Seng Yew 11:45, November 1st, 2006 (UTC +8)

Who is not doing proper research? Is the SWCU a unit of the PLA? Is it responsible for defence? - Privacy 21:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Who is not doing proper research?

-- Urm... You? :-P Besides, you totally missed my point. My question was, what will stop the SWCU from acting in the SARs to assist in their counter-terrorist ops? And even if your statements were true, they should be in the SAR articles and not here. Wouldn't you agree? And one more thing, I created this article based on my own research, you just waltzed in here and slapped unnecessary and useless facts and accused others of not doing proper research... hell, you didn't even add anything relevant directly to the SWCU! --Seng Yew 16:30, November 2nd, 2006 (UTC +8)

p.s. By the way Privacy, this is wikipedia, not a pro-sometihing/anti-something forum... if you have evidence to back up your statements, just reference them in the article...

Please stop with the irrelevant edits. This claim is unsourced and even more importantly contradicted in Special Administrative Region. Even if the claim proves to be true, it still has no place in this article. This article is about a particular police unit not overarching national policy decisions. In the United States, local law enforcement units have no jurisdiction over federal property in their territory, should we mention this in every article about every city police force or county sheriff's office? This would, if proved true, be much better in Hong Kong and Macau. Cheers. L0b0t 22:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

What is unsourced and contradicted? All national policy decisions of the P.R.C. are not relevant to the two territories unless for those each basic law provides. Few States have similar arrangement and this must have to be mentioned. By not mentioning this you are indeed POV pushing and putting an equal sign between P.R.C. and Mainland China. This is politically incorrect and is denying P.R.C. exercises sovereignty over the two. - Privacy 21:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SWCU badge.JPG

Image:SWCU badge.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Patch immage

Are you sure about it? Because it is a wolf and not a leopard.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.204.172.140 (talk) 07:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

About the title

I'm a little confused about the current title of this article, Snow Leopard Commando Unit, because I thought that this was the old name of the department. Doesn't it say in the source citing the name was changed to Snow Wolf Commando Unit? Also, I noticed that the information says that Snow Wolf is the former title. Can someone please clarify? Zach (talk) 02:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)