Talk:Peelian principles

Peelian principles has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 4, 2021. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Law Enforcement Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Law enforcement in the United Kingdom#Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories|police forces of the Crown dependencies and British Overseas Territories]] The anchor (#Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

The link for reference #6 - "Sir Robert Peel and the new Metropolitan Police" - is broken. Slarrab (talk) 17:36, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slarrab, the link is working now. It was an issue with the National Archives website which they fixed. Whizz40 (talk) 16:35, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An I.P. made this edit to Robert's Rules of Order today. My read is that it's a piece of (fairly amusing, frankly) trolling, but I thought I'd solicit views before reverting. Does anybody have any views as to whether somebody searching for this page could realistically end up at Robert's Rules of Order? Steve Smith (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree there is probably no need for the hatnote. Whizz40 (talk) 06:16, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP here. (Same editor, but different IP address because my router shifts cyclically). The reason I added the disambiguation is because I remember the "Peelian principles" as an important piece of history from reading an article, and I could only remember it by the name "Robert", from its purported originator, Robert Peel. I was unable to find it until several months later, when I stumbled across the name "Peelian Principles". A link like this would have helped me find it at a more appropriate time. Before I realized the correct name, I simply remembered and referred to it as "Robert's rules of policing". Regards. 116.216.30.55 (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Sources cite the influence of the British model of policing on policing in the United States." This cannot (still?) be true. The US police is using the direct opposite of the Peelian principles, namely fear and overwhelming force to control the public. I'll remove the text. Dustie (talk) 10:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly have Views about U.S. (and Canadian) policing, but the material you removed was properly cited, and I've restored it. If there are sources suggesting that the influence of Peelian principles on American policing has waned—which strikes me as very possible—they should be included as well. Steve Smith (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added with sources. Whizz40 (talk) 20:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]