Talk:International Police Organization

I started this page in August 2023 and prepared it well. In September and October, other users added unsourced and promo materials. Rather than removing unsourced and promo materials, User:Scope_creep @Scope_creep moved the page to the draftspace. I believe once the page is well settled, the user should not have moved it to draftspace but rather just remove the unsourced material. We do not move the whole page to draftspace when some users mess it up but we rather undo their changes. The user who moved the page to draftspace informed me on my Talk page, and I responded 12 days ago, but he did not respond. Therefore, I re-started the page with a version before it was manipupated with the promo and unsourced material. Topjur01 (talk) 13:27, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

:This page is well written, well sourced, and of a much better quality than many Wiki pages. No need to move it to draftspace. The page has been on the mainspace since August 2023. If it needs minor improvements, we can do them on mainspace. Topjur01 (talk) 13:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm reposting my assessment of the article's prior sourcing from the AfD for reference: {{tq|Among the assembled sources, I see two ([30] Dnevnik, [31] RTV) that clearly provide independent, significant coverage of the organization, as opposed to either a) an interview with a representative b) descriptions of an event organized by them without description of the organization c) brief mention in passing regarding disaster relief coverage d) articles positively gushing about their disaster relief efforts that look more like PR than investigative journalism. The problem is that while the article as written follows the PR line that this is a storied scholarship and disaster relief organization, the Dnevnik and RTV pieces instead describes it as an organization that engages in false advertising regarding its relationship to the police, in addition to having ties to private security companies and far-right parties. RS like Balkan Insight and Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, which have been linked in this discussion, second this characterization, emphasizing the organization's ties to far-right parties when mentioning it in passing.}} Unless additional RS directly dispute the claims of far-right ties or provide a preponderance of independent coverage of their aid efforts to the exclusion of mentions of their less savory aspects, challenging these characterizations is a violation of WP:DUE. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|International Police Organization|answered=yes}}

The International Police Organization IPO is an NGO with National and International membership that does not pursue economic activities for-profit goals, cooperates with National and International State Institutions to achieve its objectives and goals but is independent of public administration, state institutions, political or religious, whether these be native or foreign.↵​↵Membership in IPO is open to all those who meet the criteria according to the respective categories↵and who adapt to the IPO program, regardless of race, gender, color, religion, and political ideas.

The establishment, creation of this Organization is based on the ratified National and International↵Legislation to support, assist and advise law enforcement institutions and citizens through various↵Training and Projects to be closer to the community.

The vision is to build a society without threats of crime and aims to work closely with law↵enforcement agencies to provide technical and professional assistance in the prevention of criminal↵offenses, the study, investigation, and investigation of perpetrators, tracing, apprehending,↵documenting criminal activity and bringing suspects to justice, as well as developing and↵implementing strategies and action plans for the prevention and combating of general and organized↵crime through co-operation with National & International Organizations for the implementation of↵programs and different projects about this field. US-Encyclopedia (talk) 23:26, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

I have verifiable evidence and proof regarding the content on this page and would like to request some edits. Could you please assist with incorporating these changes?

Please let me know how I can provide the necessary sources and documentation.

Thank you for your time and help Colinseke1 (talk) 14:13, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

{{u|JustinSeke}} (by the way, maybe disclose whether you have any connection to ColinSeke above), we have multiple generally reliable news sources asserting that IPO does not have formal ties to police departments, and does have ties to the Serbian far right: [https://www.dnevnik.si/novice/slovenija/policijska-organizacija-ki-s-policijo-nima-zveze-2087713/], [https://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/kdo-stoji-za-mednarodno-policijsko-organizacijo-ipo-ki-je-pri-nas-pomagala-po-poplavah/679297], [https://balkaninsight.com/2021/12/09/with-ruling-party-ties-serbian-right-wing-security-groups-flourish/]. Can you please address why you believe these sources are insufficient? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:44, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:Also, to clarify the goalposts: in order to be persuaded to change this text, I would want to see news sources or academic publications (preferably multiple) that have no ties to IPO, which report on and deny these claims in their own voices (i.e. not attributed to or in the context of an interview with representatives of IPO). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:49, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi Rosguill,

:Thank you for your message. I can confirm that I am connected to ColinSeke1 and that we are working together to ensure that accurate and verifiable information is presented.

:Regarding the concerns you raised:

:# The International Police Organization (IPO) holds Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) – a status that is granted only to credible and active non-governmental organizations.

:# This recognition from the UN demonstrates that IPO is acknowledged as an international organization with consultative functions, and is far from being an isolated or questionable entity.

:# The claim that IPO has no formal ties to police departments is not entirely accurate, as IPO has collaborated with law enforcement agencies in various countries – particularly in training programs and awareness campaigns. These activities are publicly documented and traceable via official press releases and event records.

:# Allegations linking IPO to the Serbian far-right are based on selective or misinterpreted reporting. If needed, I am more than happy to provide a detailed rebuttal of these claims along with context and counter-evidence.

:I am fully prepared to provide links to official UN directories, publicly available documents, and other reliable sources to support this clarification.

:Thank you,

:JustinSeke JustinSeke (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

::You need to provide secondary sources to support the above, your assertions alone are not valid arguments on WIkipedia. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:::https://www.interpolice.org/post/ipo-accreditation-at-united-nationsecosoc-special-consultative-status?utm_source=chatgpt.com is that enough or do you need more? JustinSeke (talk) 18:13, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

::::https://esango.un.org/civilsociety/showProfileDetail.do?method=showProfileDetails&profileCode=670645 here the un confirms the status of the IPO Organization. JustinSeke (talk) 18:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::These are not WP:SECONDARY sources. Like I said, you should look for journalistic or academic coverage. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::This is an official United Nations document and their website. JustinSeke (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::It's a database entry, which does not include significant independent analysis or other coverage, just boilerplate details about their registration, and what little information that is not totally trivial is clearly just direct quotes from IPO's own material (e.g. the mission statement). It is not a secondary source. It also doesn't actually contradict any of the information you're taking issue with, so even if it was a completely admissible, top-quality secondary source, it doesn't support the changes that you are proposing. As I stated in my second comment here, given that we have multiple seemingly reliable secondary sources, in order to outweigh their claims you need to present sources of equal-or-higher quality that {{tq|report on and deny these claims in their own voices}}.

:::::::Alternatively, if you can demonstrate that Dnevnik (Slovenia) and Radiotelevizija Slovenija and Balkan Insight are all unreliable, then their claims would have no basis for inclusion. However, that's probably going to be a lot harder to do than to find additional coverage in other WP:RS, as fully-professional national/international-level news organizations are typically considered reliable until demonstrated otherwise. It's also not going to be enough to point to IPO materials and claim that this is evidence of unreliability--you essentially need to provide independent evidence that these publications each have a reputation of unreliability and consistently publish inaccurate or fabricated materials without issuing timely corrections. Additionally, it was my and other editors' assessment of the prior deletion discussion for this article that without those three sources, the article does not have enough independent citations to meet WP:ORGCRITE (and quite a few editors felt that it was falling short even with those citations); in other words, if you discard those sources and can't provide any new, independent, secondary sources, you would not have enough references to justify having an article.

:::::::Tangentially, you should make a proper paid editing and/or conflict of interest disclosure on your user page and also on this talk page if you are affiliated with IPO, which seems pretty self-evident from your prior responses. You can learn how to do so properly by reading through those two linked policies/guidelines. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I would like to respectfully point out that the sources currently cited—Balkan Insight, Dnevnik (Slovenia), and Radiotelevizija Slovenija (RTV SLO)—all exhibit a degree of political or editorial bias that should be taken into account when evaluating their reliability, especially on politically sensitive topics such as associations with far-right movements.

::::::::* Balkan Insight is operated by BIRN and is rated by MediaBiasFactCheck as "Left-Center" with a clearly established editorial stance. While it has a reputation for investigative journalism, its reporting may reflect specific political narratives rather than a purely neutral analysis. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/balkan-insight/

::::::::* Dnevnik is widely recognized as having a left-wing orientation, as noted in its own public profiles and reflected in its editorial tone. This ideological leaning can shape the framing and focus of its reporting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnevnik_%28Slovenia%29?utm

::::::::* RTV SLO, Slovenia’s national broadcaster, while officially independent, has faced repeated concerns about political interference in its operations. According to its Wikipedia article and external watchdogs, its editorial direction has fluctuated depending on the ruling government, raising questions about its objectivity in certain contexts. Radiotelevizija Slovenija

::::::::None of these sources offer neutral, third-party investigation or rebuttal regarding IPO’s claim to ECOSOC consultative status. Instead, they reflect localized political framing and in some cases may rely on assumptions or implications rather than concrete evidence.

::::::::* I am currently seeking more independent, third-party coverage to support a balanced view. In the meantime, I suggest that any potentially contentious claims about far-right associations should be attributed clearly and not presented as undisputed fact unless more conclusive sources can be presented.

::::::::* Transparency: For transparency, I acknowledge that I am affiliated with IPO and am therefore disclosing a conflict of interest in accordance with WP:COI.

::::::::I’m not suggesting that these sources be discarded entirely, but I do believe their bias and political alignment must be weighed carefully when using them to make definitive claims about the nature of an international organization. Additionally, the UN ECOSOC listing confirms IPO's Special Consultative Status, and unless contradicted by equally authoritative secondary sources, that fact should be acknowledged in any balanced article. JustinSeke (talk) 08:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::WP:MBFC is not a reliable source, and your claims about bias have not been substantiated. In general your argumentation here is a total nonstarter. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:07, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::Hi Rosguill

::::::::::Thank you for your feedback regarding the sources. While I understand the need for robust secondary sources, I remain concerned about the inclusion of the phrase referring to “far right associations.” Without clear, independent evidence from reputable journalistic or academic sources directly addressing these allegations, such terminology risks casting an unintended negative light on the organization.

::::::::::I respectfully request that we remove or modify the “far right” reference until and unless we can provide equally authoritative, neutral secondary sources that address and refute those claims in their own voices. This approach would help ensure that the article remains balanced, verifiable, and in keeping with our goal of factual and neutral presentation.

::::::::::I appreciate your consideration and look forward to working together to achieve an accurate depiction of the subject.

::::::::::Best regards, JustinSeke (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::In light of the reporting by Balkan Insight, and your conflict of interest: no. The characterization of connections to the far right and criminal forces is the center of that article's reporting, and it clearly names International Police Organization as part of this network of forces. This assertion is repeated directly in RTV's coverage both in extensive quotes attributed to Sasa Dragoljo, but crucially, also in its own words: {{tq| IPO v Srbiji povezujejo s skrajno desnico in celo kriminalnim podzemljem}}. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:18, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::ok that's very unfortunate.

::::::::::::is there any other way we could solve this? JustinSeke (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::I would reconsider my perspectives if you can provide suitable academic or journalistic sources supporting your edits, as previously stated. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 12:13, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Hi Rosguill,

::::::::::::::The International Police Organization (IPO) wants to make it clear that we absolutely have no connections or affiliations with far-right, extremist, or criminal groups. We operate fully in line with international laws and are committed to the principles of justice, integrity, and neutrality.

::::::::::::::Any claims suggesting that we’re linked to such groups are baseless and don’t reflect our values or the work we do. The IPO continues to work closely with law enforcement agencies and relevant organizations worldwide to promote peace, security, and cooperation, without any ideological bias.

::::::::::::::We strongly reject any misrepresentation of our organization and want to emphasize our commitment to staying neutral and apolitical in all our operations. Any claims about ties to extremist or criminal elements are simply false and go against the core values on which the IPO was founded.

::::::::::::::If you have any further questions or need more information, the IPO is happy to provide additional clarification or documentation. JustinSeke (talk) 12:22, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::{{od}}Mandy Rice-Davies applies _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:43, 22 April 2025 (UTC)