User talk:Royo322

Welcome!
Hello, Royo322, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft
It looks like you tried to move your draft live, but just moved it into another userpage. However I did want to note that there are some issues with the page, so it's good it wasn't made live yet.

This still has a massive issue with original research and coming across as a reflective essay on the topic. It also has wording like "of course", which should only be used in an essay as those come across like they're being written from the viewpoint of a specific person and towards a specific audience. This page on words that lack precision covers types of words to avoid. Also, while the sourcing is generally OK, be careful of relying too heavily on popular press for major points. They're not always as accurate or neutral as they should be, even the publications that are pretty well thought of. This doesn't mean that you can't use them, just that it's best to try to find the strongest possible source and in some cases, find sources that help back up the points in the source material. While this isn't a medical topic, the guidelines at this section go over some of the issues with popular press sourcing.

You also use studies to back up claims, which is an issue because these are primary sources for the claims and research conducted by the study's authors. There are many reasons why this poses an issue, one of which being that the study's findings are going to be necessarily limited because they will only have the time, funding, and staff to review a relatively small slice of the population and topic area they're looking to study. Secondary sources help put this data into wider context and also help verify the findings in their own way, as the outlets that publish the studies only look to make sure that the study doesn't have any major issues with their work that would invalidate it. While again, not a medical topic, this training module will give further explanation about this. Essentially, you can use studies but they must be accompanied by secondary sources that cover the study and provide commentary and context.

Finally, there's the concern that this would be redundant to the existing article on the European migrant crisis, as that article should cover things like impact. This is definitely something that will need to be addressed.

I hope that this all helps - let me know if you have any questions. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2018 (UTC)