Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest criminal organizations


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

List of largest criminal organizations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article relies solely on sources from Wikipedia. It is original research on its finest. In addition, it will be incredibly difficult to find how "large" criminal organizations are in terms of members. Having studied Mexican drug cartels for years, there is still not enough information to know how big they are. The same goes for most criminal organizations out there too. ComputerJA ( ☎  •  ✎  ) 14:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * [] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.41.199 (talk) 13:36, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, but the number of foot soldiers for the respective criminal organizations is unknown. Not to mention the fact that this is only an unofficial claim by an anonymous senior agent in the U.S. government. He provides no evidences for his claim (there isn't a serious study on this fact anyways), nor does his comments represent the view of the U.S. government. The comment was made on the same year when Mexico was supposedly facing "risk of rapid and sudden collapse" like Pakistan. Makes me wonder if it was just part of the usual War on Drugs rhetoric among officials. ComputerJA ( ☎  •  ✎  ) 14:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


 * [] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.41.199 (talk) 15:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * In any case, the article is still very poorly organized and like already said, there is no a serious study for this. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 5.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 14:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lordy, what a mess. You have to go to the individual Wikipedia articles, where there are some actual reliable sources. However, even that's a problem. The Russian mafia source for the 3,000,000 members states that they're split up into "6,000 organized crime groups". Similarly, the Mexican drug cartels are considered one organization, which is laughable. And what is the Kosovo Liberation Army doing here? It committed crimes, no doubt, but it was primarily a paramilitary organization. There are issues about who would be considered "members" (does that include "associates"?), making it difficult, if not impossible, to order by size. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Cleanup or TNT. I have no problem with a list of largest-by-membership criminal organizations, and I have no problem with the numbers being drawn from other Wikipedia articles as long as those articles use verifiable sources to back up the numbers.  I DO have a problem with this list being so long.  A top-10 or maybe top-25 list would be useful, anything longer risks becoming another monster like [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Line_of_succession_to_the_British_throne&oldid=428696922 this was] until the following edit.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  23:18, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree, a mess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 00:56, June 9, 2014 (UTC-5)
 * Strong delete While there might be room for such a list on Wikipedia, this list is an unsalvageable mess. Safiel (talk) 06:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Dont delete very revealing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.41.199 (talk) 14:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong delete I agree that there's no way to know the actual number of members and the article poorly sourced, but even going on the actual Wikipedia articles themselves is a problem. The article looks unstable. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 04:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Dont deleteif you cant trust Wikipedia who can you trust — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vigortopic (talk • contribs) 13:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Please look at Wikipedia is not a reliable source. You can't cite Wikipedia as a reference, you need to cite other reliable sources. The article is mostly citing other Wikipedia articles as a reference, which is considered original research in this case. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 03:13, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment to administrator I smell the aroma of dirty socks in the vicinity, if you catch my drift. Safiel (talk) 17:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment OK, first of all, I have gang connections and I can tell you for a fact that a lot of us are editing articles about our own groups and trying to frame our rivals and making our enemies look bad or worse. I have to say that you can't trust gang related articles on Wikipedia, especially since alot of us are promoting ourselves on these articles and degrading our rivals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.9.242 (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. The Asian Boyz, for example, are listed here at 5000-12000, whereas the source in the article, an FBI report, actually pegs them at 1300-2000. I've fixed the article (which also had the inflated numbers), but not this list. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Ive expanded this article greatly from its original author as i see it may be helpful benchmark to get the score about how big this groups is relative to each other its not 100 percent accurate but i feel it will be very helpful information on the underworld groups
 * The problem is that most of the information in the article is unreliable and unverifiable. ComputerJA ( ☎  •  ✎  ) 14:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * its a work in progress you can put more accurate infos feel free to change the rankings as long as you have some references to back it up everyone is welcome to contribute and improve the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.129.95 (talk) 18:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.