User:Mango37836/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Human migration

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This is the Area that my org is working in. They house and provide services for transit migrants. This article is missing a section about transit migrants so that is something I could add.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is concise and effective. It does not include a description of the theories of migration that exist later in the article, but readers can take away a decent understanding of the topic just by reading the lead nonetheless. The next section defines the different groups of people who migrate: migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and nomads. This clarification is well placed at the beginning so the reader is made aware that migrants are not a monolith and their reasons for leaving their homes are varied. The "migration patterns and related numbers" section, the misconception that most migration is south to north is debunked through the neutral tone that the writing takes. Even though transit migrants does not show up in this article, the top corridor countries are shown in this section. This shows which countries transit migrants are moving through the most to get to their destinations. The "world economy" section could be viewed as having a pro-migration sentiment, but it is a fact that migration has a positive impact on the economic development of a country. However the inclusion of a think tank's research on the positive impact of open borders debatably sways this section into a non neutral tone. In the remittances section, the term is defined in the first sentence which is a very helpful decision because the average person may not know the term of the top of their heads. In the "forced migration" section, it is mentioned that there are contested definitions for forced migration. The debate over the definition is very significant, so this single sentence doesn't quite illustrate that. A comparison between two opposing definitions would better demonstrate to the reader the contestation of what forced migration is. In the overview section of "contemporary labor migration theories" has 3 edits saying "need quotation to verify" and 1 saying "by whom". So this section needs some work when it comes to citing the claims made. The theories that are discussed provide a wide array of different perspectives on the issue human migration; this maintains the neutral tone of the article. The "social scientific theories" section gives a good overview of the sociological and polisci explanations for immigration. The next section contains a disclaimer that there are no sources cited, which is problematic because history is an essential facet in understanding human immigration. This article overall provides readers with a decent, neutral perspective of human immigration, but there are a few things missing that I believe are essential to truly understand the topic. Firstly, transit migrants are not discussed. Many countries that see migrants come and go towards their destination experience them as transit migrants, not just migrants. Their journey to their destination and the way they impact the countries they pass through is very important to the discussion as well. In addition, the theory of unequal exchange should be included in the world systems theory section. It gives perspective into how countries that are deemed as labor-focused have so much difficulty developing; and thus people leave in order to find better opportunities elsewhere. Lastly, this article cites the World Bank for a couple statistics, yet the World Bank's role in contributing to the inflated debts of global southern countries is not mentioned in the history section. These are the things I would add to the article.