This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
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
Per WP:NOTDIC, since we should be covering things and not terms and this article covers two things, it seems like we should split this into two articles, one on the Guardia Rural and one on the Cuerpo de Defensa Rural. Thoughts? — Ƶ§œš¹[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A good idea - two distinct para-military forces performing different functions in different eras and with only the coincidence of a shared title to link them. Buistr (talk) 04:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, not enough information on either to warrant a split.--Degen Earthfast (talk) 15:28, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at WP:CONSPLIT. This is a proposal to split because these are two separate topics, not because the article is getting too large. Both are notable and coverage so far seems neutral, but it's inappropriate to have one article covering different things just because they have the same name. — Ƶ§œš¹[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 17:23, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am in favor of splitting. Amuseclio (talk) 00:00, 10 June 2019 (UTC)Amuseclio[reply]
In support of splitting. Two different subjects. Creuzbourg (talk) 22:12, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The introduction reads like a disambiguation page, so the title Rurales should be treated as such and the respective subjects should be split into their own articles. Parabellus (talk) 13:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The Rurales of the Porfiriato had a very distinctive role and ideology, which were very different from the Cuerpo de Defensa Rural. Diaz deliberately kept the Federal Army weak and underfunded in order to prevent a coup d'etat, and the Rurales were in fact the main prop of the Porfiriato regime. Note the way in which the Rurales were always given pride of place in the parades that Diaz was always holding in Mexico City-a honor that Diaz denied the Federales. This does not apply at all to the Cuerpo de Defensa Rural. Lumping in together because they happened to share the same title and were located in the same country is not helpful.--A.S. Brown (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)(UTC)[reply]
Support. I strongly agree that the article be split, and supported it in 2019. The rurales founded by Juárez and expanded by Díaz is a different entity than the modern force. I don't know how long the comment period is for a proposed split or the threshold for making a decision, but I think the arguments for split are compelling. 20:00, 30 October 2021 (UTC) Amuseclio
