Last modified on 2 May 2011, at 13:22

Category talk:Law Enforcement

Return to "Law Enforcement" page.

Hello, all. I am a little concerned with the categorization of Military under Law Enforcement. As I understand it, law enforcement is a branch of civil service, which the military is not. Armed forces are generally considered beyond the scope of civil service, I'm assuming due to the fact that armed forces by nature contain non-career "employees" who can be conscripted into service during war, and therefore cannot be considered as a civil servants. What does everyone else think? EganioTalk 00:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

We don't need to consider governmental structures at all. In most GTA games, the Army are used to chase you if you have a Wanted Level. That means they are enforcing the law. Whatever governmental structures are behind that don't really matter. The words "civil servant" don't appear in any GTA game, nor are the structures of representation, diplomacy or military heirarchy. As I explained in the other talk page, people visiting this category will be wanting to learn about how law is enforced in GTA games - which includes the Police (and SWAT), Army (we'll say all military since its not a specific service that is used), FBI and NOOSE. You absolutely don't need to be any more precise or complex or technical than that. We don't even KNOW if the military are part of the 'civil service' in this fictional GTA universe, and it might be different in each game (especially in the UK). Gboyers talk 01:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Makes sense. EganioTalk 02:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: Category:Emergency was being used for ALL emergency service vehicles, and they were only subdefined into the individual services. I don't think theres any point in having vehicles in both, and I don't think that we want as many categories as we're going to have. Emergency Services, Emergency Vehicles, Law Enforcement, Law Enforcement Vehicles.
These could all be in Emergency Services. Then underneath that you would have "Military" (for everything to do with the military, including vehicles) and the same with Police, FBI, Fire Service, Ambulances, Hospitals - and you don't need separate vehicles categories under each of them. You could just have Emergency Vehicles as a category that all vehicles are in (as well as in Police). That simplifies things a lot, and doesn't mess up categorisation because you would have Emergency Vehicles under both Vehicles and Emergency Services, and each vehicle would be under Vehicles, Emergency Vehicles and Police (or whichever).Thoughts? Gboyers talk 01:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Scrumptious. Excellent suggestions! I was thiking I would then subcategorize Category:Emergency Services under Category:Infrastructure. Does that make sense? Any other categories it could fall under? EganioTalk 02:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Emergency Services would fall under Infrastructure AND Public Service, whilst Emergency Vehicles would fit under Emergency and Vehicles, and each individual section could fall under either of those (or both). Just to point out, don't be scared to put something in multiple categories, remember that all vehicles are in Category:Vehicles and a lot will be in subcategories too. The entire point of categories is to make things easier to find, so it is better to oversubcategorise than be picky and say military aren't technically law enforcement, or hospitals aren't technically civil service. Gboyers talk 08:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: Although I'm not sure that individual emergency and law enforcement vehicles should be under Public Service Vehicles as well. I'd keep Emergency Vehicles separate in a subcategory of Public Service Vehicles. Gboyers talk 08:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)