Talk:Vermont Department of Corrections

Memorials
I reverted good faith edit which attempted to memorialize officers killed within the Department of Corrections. I have difficulty with and can probably find support for this. The reason is that there are very very few articles in Wikipedia that aren't affected by deaths somehow. Post Office for example. Places. Highways. Every place in the country has had at least one significant and maybe heroic fatality. If we did this, articles would be jammed with nothing but memorials. Student7 (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I do not agree. There is no violation of any wikipedia policy.  It is simply a matter of opinion.  I only provided links to information to anyone interested.  Most law enforcement personnel find this information highly relevant.  I did not write extensive memorials and I personally think there is a big difference between a law enforcement death and someone dying on a highway, but that's just me.  SGT141 (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * And so you would what, put it to a vote each time someone (our of the blue) wanted to memorialize somebody they "felt" was important? There are over 2 million articles in Wikipedia and over several million people being killed each year worldwide. This appears to violate WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Student7 (talk) 00:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion: WP:NOTMEMORIAL holds true on this. The two guys listed there are inherently non-notable and would fail WP:BIO and WP:BLP1E. Wikipedia is not a place to enshrine the dead, and so it doesn't belong in this article. I'd also remind you of WP:3RR and how you're both close to violating it. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Since you insist, I think it will survive better as a "news item" if you put the year each died. Maybe the place? "One in Waterbury in 1983, the other in..." Does this need an additional reference?


 * With thousands of people dying and being murdered every day, this is the only article I have worked on that has this type of "information." And I monitor over a thousand articles.


 * Also, it is extremely possible that inmates have experienced violence at each others hands, and, in the old days, at the hands of guards as well. Do we number them? I suspect far more inmates than guards BTW.


 * Editors have been through all this years ago which is why they arrived at WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Even at that, it is WP:UNDUE since there is very little else in the article. Student7 (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * We're going through another spate of memorials again. We've already had a third opinion. It will be necessary to escalate if the editor persists in re-adding these names. Please stop. Student7 (talk) 20:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The editor contacted me on my discussion page and pointed out that the proscription against "friends and relatives" didn't apply since the people commemorated didn't fall into those two categories. Actually, the intent was to remove all people that are WP:NN from Wikipedia. It is an encyclopedia not a memorial or a blog. There are other sites for that. I've been told that there is one on facebook and a completely separate wiki for memorials. That is where they belong.


 * The articles on Corrections have been little read, the reason this has persisted for this long. I've pointed out the problem to the admins and edited a few articles. I've suggested language changes to the policy to avoid confusion in the future.


 * In the best of all possible worlds they will write a bot to edit the Corrections articles back the way they should be. But I suspect we will have to do it all by hand and endlessly argue over a policy that everyone else beyond this category article understands completely. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Student7 (talk) 12:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Just fixed them myself. The larger states, of course, had none since it would have taken a whole new article! Kind of begs the question.


 * They settled this a long time ago with the victims of 9/11 when they decided not to mention them in here. Some editors got quite excited about that at the time.


 * Some editor set up format in one DOC article and it was copied to other article with the names from a nationwide database. Maybe just one or two editors doing them all. Student7 (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Multilingual links
WhisperToMe (talk) 03:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Arabic: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/ara
 * Bosnian: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Bos2
 * Burmese: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Burmese2
 * English: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/eng2
 * French: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Fr2
 * Nepali: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Nepali2
 * Russian: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Rus2
 * Somali: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Somali2
 * Spanish: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Spa2
 * Swahili: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Swahili2
 * Vietnamese: http://humanservices.vermont.gov/lep_langbar/Viet2


 * We've been talking about such lists. I suppose these should go into a separate list/article someplace and be, in turn, linked to by other "human services/vt state" articles? Too long for specfic articles, which, I presume, is why the editor placed them here instead. Student7 (talk) 12:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)