Talk:Fixing Broken Windows

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Fixing Broken Windows is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess. Remember, the project aims for no vandalism and no conflict, if an article needs attention regarding vandalism or breaches of wikiquette, please add it to the article watch list.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Assessed B Class. Dep. Garcia ( Talk | Help Desk | Complaints ) 12:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

the "Critics of the theory" section needs a rewrite. It is actually very anti-critic and therefore npov 66.75.49.213 06:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I have re-cast the section to remove rebuttals. This is a list of criticisms that have been offered, not a debating ground. Fumblebruschi 21:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I have citations for some of this section form some project work. Currently in a source on Antisocial behaviour, but I'm going to be checking the original sources for my work. I'll add these in at that point. Acidsaturation 12:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Footer contains a link to the unrelated article "Broken window fallacy". The author states this is unrelated. I say don't link to it then.

I agree. Quincybuddha

[edit] To do

• ISBN and authors' names.

• Detail NYC crime rates (5% decrease or 25% or what? And in which categories of crime?) or link to relevant page.
  • Definitely not a decrease in rape, that's for sure.

--Ed Poor

I haven't read Freakanomics in a while, but I believe they said that the drop in the crime rate was not due to stricter gun laws. I think the third factor was more police on the streets, but I'd have to double check. --Spambi

I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning on the page, but in Malcolm Gladwell's book "The Tipping Point" he refers to this principle a lot, but I don't think he refers to it as the "broken windows theory." At least, I can't recall him calling it that. Kat, Queen of Typos 10:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

There's a section on the Broken Windows Theory from page 141-146, in the chapter "The Power of Context (Part One) =3

[edit] Wikipedia's success

Ironically, Wikipedia works on much the same principle. Articles that are watched closely are hard to damage, because changes that aren't valuable are quickly reverted. Graffiti just can't stay up very long.

But this depends on enough people watching enough articles. --Uncle Ed 16:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Right. But does the fact that vandalism gets reverted quickly decrease its frequency? Pomte 21:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Certainly not. The timing and method of vandalism reversion is an art, not a science. I guess the point is not to let it accumulate, or stay up too long. But it can give it too much energy if it's removed right away. The idea is to make it too boring for anyone to bother making a concerted effort to mess up pages. --Uncle Ed 22:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)