Jump to content

Talk:Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]

These are not controversies, they are HORRIFYING CRIMES committed by Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:7:1980:CA8:99A:6BFA:6D5B:F9B0 (talk) 16:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Userfied

[edit]

This page is an attack page that appears to have been created primarily to disparage its subject. There is already a Wikipedia BLP in place for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and this pageappears to have been created as an attack page that consists solely of attacks on a Living Person. --OregonWrestling (talk) 22:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's now been declined twice for db-attack, so please use Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion if you believe it should be deleted; you would then get wider input from the community. Thanks Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 23:25, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This page is in my user space. It is not an attack page, note that no page links to this page while I am working on it. After it is ready for main space, it will be moved there. Outback the koala (talk) 02:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have move the page into main space. It's ready enough, and this will allow other editors to improve it further and expand the article. Outback the koala (talk) 03:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep... that's definitely WP:BOLD. So, I'll raise the stakes, and go for WP:BRD. Discussion back at Talk:Joe_Arpaio Fearofreprisal (talk) 10:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree completely. This article does not appear to be an attack page. The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is notable primarily for being controversial. Additionally, controversies surrounding Joe Arpaio are in his article. Although the controversies are extremely notable and warrant coverage on Wikipedia, such coverage is likely to take over the article, leading to undue weight and violating [[WP:BLP]. This article serves as a good place to cover the relevant controversies on both Arpaio and his office. However, I do think it is non-neutral; I've added the neutrality-check template, which I explain below.  dmyersturnbull  ⇒ talk 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an attack page, it's a hide the truth page. Each entry is a demonstrably true, factually accurate account of actions undertaken by Arpaio that his fans here on Wikipedia are desperate to keep off his bio page. This page exists as an excuse for this information not residing on its appropriate page. At the end of the day, if the truth makes someone seem a bad person, you blame the person, not the historian. Wikipedia should not take sides, it should just report the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.183.154.31 (talk) 09:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality check

[edit]

To have a neutral perspective, this article should include statements Arpaio and his office have in defense against accusations.  dmyersturnbull  ⇒ talk 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't that violate the reliable sources policy? ;) Jtrainor (talk) 07:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I don't much think any news outlet actually cares about Arpaio's opinion or statements. In fact I find it hard to believe any sane person would care about a single thing he has to say, but that's just me. ~九尾の氷狐~ (「Sumimasen!」 「Dochira samaka?」) 20:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously he has SOME support -- he's been re-elected 4 times. I agree, the article is biased, and needs balance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xchsxbigxmike (talk • contribs) 03:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defense? Well, I guess claiming the evidence against him doesn't exist because he DESTROYED it and then backing up any claim he makes as word-of-mouth "facts", supported solely by people he hired. Then sure, we can just totally add in "defense". 124.150.62.143 (talk) 05:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Sutter Cane[reply]

There does not seem to be any active discussion regarding this here on the talk page. I have removed the POV check template at this time, feel free to readd if you are still interested and be specific about what you would like checked. Thanks. Outback the koala (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

False arrest lawsuit results

[edit]

This page doesn't have some of the latest information, specifically the resolution of a series of lawsuits involving false arrest and prosecution. There have been over $12 million in payouts by the county to date. Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 12:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the "end of the story" to several items in this article, rulings in lawsuits, the dropped federal investigation, and million-dollar awardsDr. Conspiracy (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sheriff's Posses

[edit]

There is a whole other branch of controversy involving the Sheriff's Posses. One area is the ambiguity in insurance coverage for Posse-owned vehicles. This made a stir in the local press when one of the Posses had to cease operation.

An entire article could be written about the antics of the Sheriff's Cold Case Posse, assigned by Arpaio to run an investigation about Barack Obama's birth certificate in 2012. As of 2014, Arpaio is still giving interviews saying that the birth certificate investigation is ongoing. I don't see how this article is complete without the birther angle.Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation of Judge Snow

[edit]

While it is perhaps premature to include this in the Wikipedia article, reports appeared in the Press [1] that say Arpaio is investigating Attorney General Eric Holder and federal judge G. Murray Snow (the same judge who ruled against Arpaio in a racial-profiling lawsuit). This would fit a pattern of investigations against opponents detailed so clearly in this Wikipedia article.Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Selective Service registration and organ donors

[edit]

There's no evidence that either of these were controversial. Is this section only here to have an example of something nice Arpaio did? 96.246.69.230 (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:16, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pink underwear to death

[edit]

"despite a man being forced to wear them until he died. His family sued and the court found that it was punishment before his hearing."

Added by an anon IP, and now it's gone. And the claim was not supported by the reference. MartinSFSA (talk) 15:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maricopa_County_Sheriff%27s_Office_controversies&oldid=1205277830"