User:S cuscun/sandbox

Article Evaluation
The article I am choosing to evaluate is the Refugee Crisis article. The article is informative and includes information on who can be considered a refugee, why and how refugees are created, political responses to persons in need and more.

The article is well written and concise, nothing really distracted me from the direct and to-the-point information. The only downfall would be the lack of some important sources. There is no source in the definition section for example.

The article is neutral and refers to particular points in history. The information is not biased and for the most part, well cited.

When referring to conflict in particular areas, some areas were underrepresented (such as Nigeria and the Central African Republic) and some are well represented (such as Somalia and Afghanistan).

The links worked for the most part, although whilst looking through the references section a few "dead links" appeared. The links also seemed to be from appropriate sources. Most of the sources appear to be from international news organizations, which are reliable for the most part but may, in fact, be biased. Some sources also come from national websites which from the first wikipedia training are not considered "verifiable" sources.

This particular articles talk page does not feature any discussion - just a comment about one section with no further comments or replies made.

This article discusses refugees and the refugee crisis in a different way than discussed in class in the sense that it goes over the history and political aspects of refugees. Although we discuss definition in class, this article gives a basic overview of several refugee crises over the years.

Canada-United States Third Safe Country Agreement Article Notes
The existing wikipedia article is divided into the following categories:

Introduction: Is well done. Goes over basic information quickly and informatively.

1.Areas of effect --> pretty well complete with information

2.Exceptions to the agreement --> The exceptions could be elaborated

3.Controversy and calls for suspension: This is split into several sub categories: 3.1: Following U.S executive orders, 3.1.1: Calls for suspension and 3.1.2: Emergency parliamentary debate. --> These categories could be omitted or elaborated upon, because they speak more about Donald trumps general migration policies and not specifically about the Third safe country agreement. I would change these categories into Canada and The United States as their own categories and place positive and negative responses as their distinct sub categories. I would also change 3.2 and 3.3 into their own categories.

Additions to the Canada - U.S STCA Article
* Writing in italic script shows items that were previously in the existing wikipedia article.*

The Canada–United States Safe Third Country Agreement, officially the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries, is a treaty between the governments of Canada and the United States to better manage the flow of refugee claimants at the shared land border.

During the 1990's Canada and the U.S struggled to meet an agreement regarding the "safe third country" clause. Only after September 11 2011, when the United States saught to re-vamp it's national security policies, did the possibility of this agreement come back into discussion.

''Under the agreement persons seeking refugee status must make their claim in the first country they arrive in, either the United States or Canada, unless they qualify for an exception. For example, refugee claimants who are citizens of a country other than the United States that arrive from the United States at the Canada–United States land border can only pursue their refugee claims in Canada if they meet an exception under the Safe Third Country Agreement.''

''The agreement was signed on December 5, 2002 in Washington, D.C. by Bertin Côté (Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy of Canada) and Arthur E. Dewey (Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration, United States Department of State). It entered into force on December 29, 2004.''

New structure:

Areas of effect
''The Safe Third Country Agreement applies to refugee claimants who are seeking entry to Canada or the United States at Canada-United States land border crossings (including by train). It also applies at airports if a person seeking refugee protection in one country was determined not to be a refugee in the other, and is in transit through the other country as part of their deportation. For example, a refugee claimant in Canada who has been determined not to be a refugee in the United States, has been ordered deported from the United States, and is in transit through a Canadian airport as part of their removal from the United States.'' The safe third country agreement is often implemented to prevent asylum seekers from "forum shopping". Those who do this are seen as being less honest about their need for protection.

Cananda
Prime minister Justin Trudeau has publicly stated that Canada welcomes any refugee fleeing for political reasons. Canada does have resettlement caps. In 2017, the resettlement cap was 7500. Before the implementation of the STCA, about 8000-10000 people were able to make refugee claims at the Canada-U.S. border each year. This number has been dropping significantly every year due to the increased difficulty to make a claim due to the STCA. In 2012, only 3790 claims were made. Canada can return refugees that arrive at border points from the United States.

The United States
In January 27 2018, the Trump administration placed a 120 day travel ban on persons from "Foreign Terrorist Nations". The countries included Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen. This ban has been said to be targeting countries that are predominantly muslim. Refugees that have been living in the United States for more than a year are banned from making a claim to asylum. On the international scale, the United States has been highly questioned and criticized about being truly "safe" for asylum seekers. This is due to procedures such as expedited removal, (the removal of persons who are believed to be carrying fraudulent documents without a hearing) in which asylum seekers are frequently abused, and mandatory detention, where persons who are under-documented or undocumented are subject to being detained in poor conditions for an unknown length of time. Other questionable procedures include the one year filing deadline, no access to legal aid and having to wait to apply for employment.

Exceptions to the Agreement
Exceptions to the Safe Third Country Agreement are defined as four types: family member exceptions, unaccompanied minors exception, document holder exceptions, and public interest exceptions.

Documentation Exception
If an individual enters Canada or the U.S with only a validity visa or no visa at all, because none was required.

Family Relations
In order for an asylum seeker to claim their familial status with someone in the third country, said person must be over eighteen, have been accepted as a refugee or have an eligible refugee claim pending, or have lawful status.

Unaccompanied Minors
To be legally seen as an unaccompanied minor, the individual must be under eighteen, unmarried and have no parent in Canada or the United States.

Death Penalty
Those who are subject to or awaiting the death penalty in the United States or another Country are exempt from being deported from Canada. In addition to meeting the criteria for an exception under the agreement, refugee claimants must still meet all other eligibility criteria of the relevant immigration legislation for the country they are claiming status in.

Controversy and Calls for Suspension
The United States has been questioned as being safe for asylum seekers by Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Council for Refugees, and the Canadian Council of Churches. Reasons for this include not being able to work until 180 days after their asylum claim, and not being eligible for free legal assistance. Legal representation tends to be an important factor regarding the success of the asylum seekers claim.

Compliance with International Law
''Safe third country agreements are not explicitly mentioned in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. Instead, their legality is derived from Article 31 of the convention, which states that a refugee should not be punished for illegally entering a country if they are arriving directly from a country where they were under threat. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) itself has cautioned against interpreting safe third country agreements too broadly, though it acknowledges that they may be acceptable in some circumstances. Such ambiguities have led some legal professionals in Canada to question the legality of the Canada–United States Safe Third Country Agreement.''

The United-States has been accused of not being a safe environment for asylum seekers on the international scale. The U.S. refugee and asylum law has been proven to not accurately represent asylum seekers. Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, a country is to "not return asylum seekers to a third country if they will risk deportation to their home country." Canada frequently breaks this rule by returning certain asylum seekers to the U.S.

Dangerous Border Crossings
Irregular crossings have been increasing since the election of President Trump due to his promises of travel bans and deportations. In some cases, these refugees have received amputations due to frostbite and concerns have been raised that some refugees may freeze to death on their way across the border.   Because claims can only be made at a point of entry (a land border) there is a fear of increase in human smuggling and other unauthorized modes of entry. These can often be dangerous, and are difficult to track.

Review/Reflection of Experience
Before beginning this process, I was a bit sceptical because I had been told my entire life that wikipedia wasn't "a reliable source" and that "anyone could write nonsense". When I began to do the weekly trainings, however, I discovered that in fact a lot of man power goes into making wikipedia articles reliable and accurate. The article I chose to review was the Canada-United states Third Safe Country Agreement article. This article was already fairly informative, although some information was absent. I decided to take on this challenge because although adding to a fairly well done article would be difficult, I was interested and passionate about the topic. The TSCA is an issue that effects asylum seekers in our own back yard. We Canadians pride ourselves on being welcoming and generous, but in fact cause injustice through this agreement on a daily basis.

Being a University student who often writes extensive papers, it was difficult to limit myself to small pieces of information and to omit my own opinions. A summary of my changes can be seen in the note above the article in my sandbox under the subheading "Canada-United States Third Safe Country Agreement Article Notes". Compared to the earlier version, my article gives a little more in depth information about the differences between Canada and the U.S.A's policies regarding the agreement, and provides feedback on how the agreement has changed asylum claims since it's implementation.

The main difficulty I found with this assignment was the lack of academic articles I could properly use. I have cited and used five extensively, however, it was difficult to find more because they all repeated the same information about the history of the agreement, or they were opinion pieces. All in all I found this to be an interesting change from the classic "10 page paper" format formally used in university.