Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immigration and crime (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. No convincing reasons for deletion have been advanced. Colonel Warden has shown that this topic is the subject of entire monographs. The arguments that accuse the editors of the article of pushing a certain POV are invalid, as articles are not deleted on the basis of who edits them. If there are any deficiencies with the content of an article about a notable topic - and I agree that this article has substantial deficiencies - then that is grounds for improving it by editing, not for deletion.  Sandstein  08:45, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Immigration and crime
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

this article simply lists 4 countries and selective reporting of immigrants being responsible for higher rates of crime. and use of "extreme examples" like this just confirm to me the WP:UNDUE nature. it is a cover for migrant bashing. why list 4 countries only? do we have similar articles for Local residents and crime or German citizens and crime? LibStar (talk) 02:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems to need some cleanup and expansion, but accusations of criminal behavior are a major flashpoint in connection with the politics of immigration. The external link at the bottom of the page has an interesting report on the same. In short, notable topic, not going away. Ray  Talk 03:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  --  Ray  Talk 03:41, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:Battle and WP:POV. --Monterey Bay (talk) 04:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This is not a stand-alone subject that merits treatment as a seperate issue. Anything in this article would sit much better in individual country articles, or in immigration or crime-related articles. This is because "Immigration and crime" does not mean anything different than "Immigration and crime" (unlike say Rhythm and blues or Search and rescue. The article title creates the presumption of an intrinisic relationship that simply doesn't exist, and thus invites conflict. It's like having an article entitled Men and rape, Muslims and stoning or Koreans and cat eating.  --Pontificalibus  (talk) 23:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Exactly the last examples (excluding the Koreans perhaps) are good illustrations of why it is seen as an issue: almost all rape is committed by men, almost all the stoning by Muslims. And in many European countries, irrespective of what political correctness tells us, political reality clearly reflects that the relationship between immigration and crime is a widely noticed subject that fuels political discourse. Statistics are clear, immigrants tend to commit distinctly more crimes than "natives" of the same income class. Apparently, for the Swiss public, for better or for worse, the problem was concrete enough to change the constitution for it. It is in the power of the editors not to make this article a tool for "migrant bashing", by presenting the facts, as far as they are available. Trigaranus (talk) 10:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * do you have sources to back your claim that "Statistics are clear, immigrants tend to commit distinctly more crimes than "natives" of the same income class. "? In many countries this is not true. LibStar (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the link between immigrants and crime, the facts can be presented in existing articles. Almost all rape is commited by men, and you can find this out in the Rape article. Why do you think we don't we have a Men and rape article?
 * um, there are plenty of sources looking into immigration and crime. The reason they do this is that statistics in many, many countries that are targets of immigration, the statistics show an appalling crime rate for immigrant communitites. This is extremely easy to substantiate, and there is no reason to have this discussion on AFD. If you are interested in the topic, you can just help collecting these references on the article talkpage.
 * Why is there no "men and rape" article? Mostly because "men and rape" would be a PC obfuscation of that is intended, namely male rapists. Also because since 99% of rapists are male anyway, a separate "men and rape" article would just be a WP:CFORK of rape. Unlike this, considerably less than 99% of crimes in Western Europe are commited by immigrants, so that immigrant criminality is a valid sub-topic and not a cfork of "criminality". --dab (𒁳) 11:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * speedy keep - this is a huge political issue in Europe. We may as well mass-delete all of Category:Creation science because from an European point of view it is a silly non-issue. Yes, "Immigration and crime" is a bad title. The article was moved away from the proper title, which was immigrant criminality, the proper term for the topic. The move was motivated by misguided political correctness. Compare moving Creation Science to Creation Pseudoscience because, doh, it is not science. "Creation Science" is still the proper term for the political issue. If you want to help, please place a move request to move the article back to its proper title. And please don't AFD topics you know nothing about just out of a whim of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --dab (𒁳) 11:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * additional comment, if the submitter had bothered to click on the "find sources" links that they themselves created, they would have noticed that google books immediately comes up with at least six monographs that have "immigration and crime" in their title. Seriously, the reviewing admin should just close this as an invalid WP:POINT submission, I do not think that anyone who actually bothers to review the topic will find that any case for deletion can be made. --dab (𒁳) 11:33, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: You don't have to be sharp-sighted to notice what political views most contributors of this article hold and what their purpose is to show by this article: to enforce opinions and blame immigrants for everything. WP isn't a propaganda platform for right-wingers. Userpd (talk) 14:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per Pontificalibus's excellent comments. Immigration does not necessarily lead to crime; it does so in some countries under some circumstances and that has to be dealt with on a case by case basis. (And I note that not all nations even have crime sections, not to mention immigrant crime.) What might be NPOV would be something like "List of nations with significant immigrant crime problem" with link to any existing sections in a country's article, and maybe two sentence summary. CarolMooreDC (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Careful about ad-hominem and other fallacies - In this discussion, there are Bulverisms in the form of "do you have sources?", assuming there aren't any, when much of the information is already sourced in the article itself. Several deletion comments in this discussion claiming the article is a platform for "immigrant bashing" and for "right-wingers", with reference to "what political views most contributors of this article hold", are basically ad-hominem. I for one am certainly on the left of the spectrum (and I strongly doubt you will find dab much further to the right), and I voted against the latest outburst of idiocy from the Swiss People's Party -- but that is not an issue here. It cannot be that a few contributors shouting "Heresy!" or rather "right-wing immigrant haters" manage to declare a central political issue in many European countries a non-entity. Propositions to split the issue into its two underlying concepts are downright absurd. In the same vein it could never be justified that "Pro-Life" has its own article though the vast majority of blastula-loving people who call themselves so are supporters of capital punishment. If it is a pivotal political issue, it is also an article. (And I mean pivotal, due to the weight it holds in public perception, and therefore in populist political discourse and party strategies.) If you are not happy with the silly "A and B" lemma, please move it back to its original title Immigrant criminality. Trigaranus (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * my comment on do you have sources refers to this being a well established international phenomenon? Is it true that migrants are more responsible for crime in say all Western countries? Simply listing 4 countries and dab's insistence of using an "extreme single example" demonstrates a NPOV and WP:UNDUE presentation

. Dab asks for speedy keep, that cannot apply if many are !voting delete here. LibStar (talk) 06:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Very controversial topic, and it can quicly be exploited by right-wing populists. Wikipedia is not made for spreading propanganda.WP:SOAPS. It seems as it has been used to spread misleading information about immigration. It would be better to integrate potential material into the the articles about crime in the given countries.Shalalal (talk) 00:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * How is this propaganda? Seriously, gentlemen, neither dab nor I, who seem to be the only ones supporting a keep here, have an agenda to spread propaganda, or "misleading information about immigration". Can I ask everybody here to read "Immigration, Crime and Justice" by William Frank McDonald and then make up your mind? Could you please not give yourselves to the illusion that it is not a well established international phenomenon? And what kind of a non-argument is this? Nobody said that immigrants are more responsible for crime in all Western countries, don't be bloody absurd. But does none of you find it notable e.g. that youths from the Balkans who have grown up as immigrants in Switzerland ("Switzerland as a significant case study", to quote the title for the first chapter in one of the essays from McDonald) commit much more violent crime than those who have grown up in the Balkans themselves? And how on earth could this be construed as racist when it's clear that it is not immigrants' "race" or "culture" that makes them more prone to violence but their socialisation as immigrants? Trigaranus (talk) 08:46, 4 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep The topic has great notability, being the subject of entire books such as Immigration and crime and Immigration, Crime and Justice. The rest is a matter of ordinary editing in accordance with our editing policy and deletion would be disruptive to this. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.