Talk:The Thin Blue Line (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Shouldn't this be two separate articles? E.g. The Thin Blue Line (sitcom) and The Thin Blue Line (documentary film). Then The Thin Blue Line could be a disambiguation page. Alternatively, whichever one is more famous (a tricky decision - probably just depends on whether one is American or British) could get the page to itself, with the more obscure one getting a parenthetical qualifier. Or it could just be left as it is. What do other people think? -- Oliver PEREIRA 04:42 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)

I think you're right. I also think (television) and (film) would be better indicators (both of which seem to be standard on Wiki') - stewacide 14:44 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

If you decide to disambiguate, make it (film), certainly; I don't know about (television) (not my area of expertise, if I have an area of expertise). :-) --KQ

More propoganda, NPOV, etc. Why are all these articles slanted towards Law Enforcement?75.72.92.166 (talk) 09:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Systemic bias. LEOs who are Wikipedians are more likely than non-LEOs to extensively edit articles related to their occupation—you write what you know, after all. Among those editors, with such an emotionally-charged subject, some are certain to have strong feelings which result in a non-neutral point of view, sometimes without even realizing it. Most of it will be sorted out over time by those Wikipedians (LEOs included) who have a better eye for bias, including their own, but some of it is bound to linger due to the same phenomenon (editors failing to recognize the bias they share, less knowledgeable editors unwilling to tackle the problem themselves). 70.172.214.70 (talk) 02:45, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

unexplained reversions[edit]

Anonymous user(s) at 76.248.29.169, please explain why you are reverting my changes. This is a disambiguation page, not an article. As such, it should not have a detailed lead or external links. Please see WP:D and MOS:DAB for details on the proper format. Nick Number (talk) 12:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I was about to say that in the absence of any response from the anonymous IPs, the next step is to take it to Requests For Page Protection, but I see that I am One of Many has already taken care of that. Thank you sir or madam. Nick Number (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Eustress for semi-protecting the article. If there are no objections, I will restore the remaining style fixes per the following guidelines:

MOS:DABINT - "The term being disambiguated should be in bold (not italics). It should begin a sentence fragment ending with a colon, introducing a bulleted list"
MOS:DAB#External links - "External links do not belong on disambiguation pages; they should not be used."
MOS:DAB#Organizing long lists by subject sections - "Very small sections may impede navigation, and should usually be avoided."

Nick Number (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Number, please do revert the page. I am One of Many (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Thin Blue Line (emblem) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:46, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hate[edit]

I’m concerned about the dubious dramatic political implications in the introduction 2601:201:C180:3E00:2975:2BB:E66D:611D (talk) 04:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Factual Inaccuracy, Spurious Claims, Lack of Neutrality[edit]

This entire disambiguation is not merely biased but a bit unhinged. Claiming that it is a white supremacy symbol is a little puzzling, and equating it to the swastika is frankly insulting. Symbols carry many meanings depending on who you ask, and this one can certainly be controversial, if not problematic in the eyes of many for various reasons. But nowhere mentioned in this is the actual interpretation of the "thin blue line" and how it has been used for decades. It's recent usage relates to protests and recent public debates about the role of police un American society. The thin blue line refers to police being a small number of individuals standing between chaos and organized society. Controversial as that image may be, it has very little to do with white supremacy or Nazism. It may be a response to Black Lives Matter protests and activism, and to many be seen as a defense of systemic racism, directly or indirectly. This page should be rewritten to reflect the actual meaning of the symbol as understood by those who use it, and further should not make unsupported comparisons with overt white supremacist symbolism like swastikas. 2600:1700:165F:9350:14FB:B05C:73B1:A783 (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]