Talk:Clerkenwell crime syndicate/Archive 1

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1

Verification

The article is not titled the Adams Bros, which would be ok. By entitling the article as you have, without specific mention that it is supposed syndicate the article becomes non-veryfiable and, without modification, does not really belong on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

Furthermore, whilst sources provided are basis for the existance of the Adams Brothers organization, they do not prove or suggest the existance of 'The Clerkenwell Crime Syndicate'. Those external references supporting the existance of a syndicate do not come from reliable sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Selector99 (talk • contribs)

  • Selector,
While I would agree to the naming of the organization, I have provided both a credible book and webite, itself used in several similar organized crime related books, which refers to the organiztion specifically as the Clerkenwell crime syndicate. While I admittedly know less about Britain's criminal underworld, I have also provided a source at least proving the existance of one of the Adams which (although admittedly refered by the British press as the Adams gang) does prove the organizations existance.
However, I believe it is the article's proper name which is in question here not its existance (nevermind as to its verification or its notibility). I have reworded the statement if reference to its name, however the Adams Brothers organization appears to in fact exist. MadMax 06:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
In regards to the reliablility of the provided external link, the website is used as a reference in at least Carlo Devito's Encyclopedia of International Organized Crime among others (including several Wikipedia articles). MadMax 06:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Sabini & the Messinas

In reference to the repeated removal of the text "(as would Sicilian mafiosi hired out by Charles Sabini and the Messina Brothers only decades before), I should point out that it is referenced by Carlo Devito's Encyclopedia of International Organized Crime. I do think it would be accurate to make the comparison that the Adams family used hired Afro-Carribeans as leverage to muscle out rivals as did Sabini and the Messina Brothers with their importing Sicilian mafiosi. MadMax 17:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Note your comments above and when you sent me a message. I would just have to agree with some earlier statements re the name of this entry. Although Devito might have decided to call them the syndicate it does not reflect the reality that they are known as the Adams family/ clan from North London/ Islington in the media. Also sometimes described as the ' A' team. Watch for the next time there is a huge robbery or gandland murder and there will be few if any references to the syndicate in the media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.43.186 (talk • contribs)

My initial problem in creating the article was that my only resources, Devito's Encyclopedia of International Organized Crime as well as the website Organized crime in Great Britain - Clerkenwell Crime Syndicate, refered to the organization only as the Clerkenwell crime syndicate. Of course, I'd be the first to admit I'm hardly an expert on organized crime in Great Britain and I have little if any access to British news articles. I've run into similar problems in the Brindle family and the Arifs. MadMax 18:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

C18 passage

Not sure that the passage at the bottom of the article on a minor, and now dead, Adams family member stated connection to C18 which is as far as I know a soccer hooligan gang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.141.83.228 (talk) 14:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sargent has convictions for drug dealing, which is related to this subject. C18 are a neo-Nazi political terrorist group. C18 were at least partly funded by these activities. The C18 faction now led by Steve Sargent (brother to "Charlie") is now called the "National Socialist Movement". Streona 09:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

No mention

The denomination of Saul Nahome is not mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.192.238 (talk) 09:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC) The denomination of the Arif gang is also not mentioned in the relevant article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.34.71 (talk) 11:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Material removed

I have removed material from this article that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Scott Mac (Doc) 15:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. Are you completely sure that all of that material is unsuported by the existing refs? At a glance it seems pretty consistant, and I fully expect to be restoringit after I have done some more thorough checking. Artw (talk) 18:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
There were no refs in the sections I removed. You are welcome to restore the material if you can add in the appropriate refs.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

There were references in the sections removed don't come in and edit pages at speed like this again. Leave comments on the talk page before and not whilst you are editing or after you have edited--194.125.57.134 (talk) 10:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I see you have now referenced the sections you have replaced. Thank you for doing this, this is all that the policy requires. Happy editing.--Scott Mac (Doc) 12:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

There were references in the sections you removed to begin with as another editor aside from me effectively pointed out to you. If you disagreed why did you not leave the etxt up for some time and raise this issue on the discussion page. You vandalised the page carried away with your own importance. --78.16.181.139 (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

here iswhat I removed. There was one reference, and it was to a blog, which is not accepted as a reliable source. The policy is, as I've explained to you numerous times, that unreferenced or poorly referenced material is removed - and not replaced until sourced properly. If there is a debate to be had, it happens in the absence of the material which is not replaced until consensus is reached that it complies with the policy. Frankly, you can insult me as much as you like (I've had worse), but your quarrel is with the policy. If you don't like it, what to do is to go to the talk page of the BLP policy and suggest a change.--Scott Mac (Doc) 17:48, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

You again ignore points raised as to why what you did was inappropriate; please back up an assertion that a blog is not an appropriate source. The blog in question gave every appearance as having been set up by Ruth Adams and for whatever reason has not been publicised anywhere else. In circumstances where it was described as seeming to be by her and contained material that you would have thought would not be within the knowledge of someone other than a member of the Adamses family or circle it was appropriate to have it her. You are rigidly interpreting rules if indeed they are the rules to the detriment of a well established page that you have had nothing to do with and now want to turn on its head. You have also not been insulted your inappropriate conduct has just been pointed out.--213.202.140.2 (talk) 16:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for replacing the material with appropriate sources. As I say, if you want to propose a policy change you are welcome to do that in the appropriate place. Happy editing.--Scott Mac (Doc) Flagged Now! 17:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

What part of you should not have removed all the material from this article do you not understand? If you had any concerns whether they were legitimate or not you should have flagged same in the proper way on the page and on the discussion page before acting. But you didn't and can't accept this wa--213.202.140.2 (talk) 21:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)s wrong.

I understand perfectly what you are saying - however, you are in error as to our policy here. Fortunately, you recent edits now comply with it, so no harm done. Cheers.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

bizzin a?

Why is this person always referred to as bizzin a? Did his homies called him bizzin a? If so you should put a section about that and explain your overuse of this bizzin a formula. By the way, your editing is really bad and you're not supposed to just sign articles of the "alleged" hometown nickname of Terry Adams. Assuming this is what "bizzin a" is referring...

With deepest patience,

Grudon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.93.223 (talk) 00:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clerkenwell crime syndicate. 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 23:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clerkenwell crime syndicate. 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, 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Clerkenwell_crime_syndicate/Archive_1"