Talk:Immigration and crime/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Broken link, questionable source, source not found

Note 42, in the Italy section, links to a PDF report from frdb.org. The link is broken; frdb.org returns a 404 error. Searching in frdb.org fails to turn up a PDF that contains the statements quoted here. There is a PDF of a presentation in Italian under a similar title. I can't determine if any of the quotes given here on Wikipedia in English correspond to something in the Italian. Unfortunately the need for work on this can't be indicated in the article due to its protected status, or at least I don't know how to do it. Poihths (talk) 15:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I believe this is the correct link, in English [1]. I'll update the article when protection expires. James J. Lambden (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Fully protected again

Please use an edit request to request a change to the article after consensus has been reached for that change. If edit warring resumes after protection expires then blocks may be levied even if WP:3RR hasn't been breached. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:31, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

So, is it acceptable to reinsert some of the well-sourced valid statistics that were cut out between the following edits? http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Immigration_and_crime&type=revision&diff=773453338&oldid=771004736 David A (talk) 17:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

I reinserted the more important matter-of-fact statistics into the page, along with some new ones, and removed the irrelevant Trump statement, as a counter-reaction after Snooganssnoogans severely slanted the page, by inserting various largely fact-free opinion pieces by one-sided pro-mass-immigration activists such as Jerzy Sarnecki. My apologies, but the situation is extremely serious, and I would much prefer if people start to look at the numbers, rather than listen to activist demagogues.

However, he can reinsert the ones that are fact-derived, and not strictly extremely misleading opinion pieces, if he wishes. David A (talk) 04:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Every single edit of mine was either sourced to a reliable secondary source (e.g. WaPo, Reuters, USA Today, PolitiFact, FactCheck.Org), with the exception of one or two pieces that were sourced to academics writing op-eds in a RS. If you want to challenge the reliability of these sources, please take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. As for the content that you added, it's all blatant original research. It's not only original research but intended to challenge or "correct" the coverage by the numerous reliable sources and experts that have been cited. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 09:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

How is citing statistics reports from official Swedish institutions original research? According to BRÅ, the rape statistics multiplied 14 times between 1975 and 2015. I do not mind some of your sources, as long as you make your sentences more matter-of-fact, and less heavily slanted, but reality should have precedency over personal opinions from biased activists. David A (talk) 11:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Horowitz's statements have been deemed false and misleading by academics and numerous news organizations and fact-checkers. That you're here digging through primary data to show that "actually, all the RS are wrong. Horowitz is right." is precisely why original research is not acceptable here on Wikipedia. Also, you seem confused as to the subject of this article: it's about the relationship between "immigration and crime" but you're chiefly just listing stats for rape without any connection to immigration. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 11:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the Swedish government decided to initiate mass-immigration from the 3rd world around 1975. Since then the rape statistics have increased 14-fold, and there were over 480000 sexually related crimes committed against women in Sweden last year. The government has also deliberately avoided to order BRÅ to investigate the exact relationship since 2005, so the actual total crime increase statistics since then are regrettably all that we have to go by. David A (talk) 13:10, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Regardless, to make this page a matter-of-fact information source, rather than a heavily POV piece of opinionated propaganda, I would like to request that all of the official statistics that were removed by Snooganssnoogans are reinserted into the text, and all of the unproven pure opinion pieces are edited out. David A (talk) 19:41, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

• Simply finding and stating stats that crime in Sweden has recently increased, where the source being quoted doesn't attribute that to immigration, is complete original research for this article. The crime could've increased due to any number of reasons. And even if you say "immigration increased recently, crime increased recently, therefore immigration is tied to crime", that is WP:SYNTH. Please find a high quality reliable source (like academic source) that actually makes the link between crime increases and immigration.VR _talk 04:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

No, absolutely not OR. First, it was Horowitz the movie director, the man responsible for starting out this very Trump-debate, who cited those stats, so it is certainly relevant, if you think the whole Trump issue is relevant...

Second, the article, at least in its recent form that was unedited, did not make any claim concerning the right interpretation of those stats.

It's not the purpose of this article to tell the reader whether immigration has caused more crime or not, since that is undoubtedly a debated issue; it's purpose is to deliver all relevant information from both sides. Wikipedia:Neutrality And neither its it "undue" to represent this information, as has been claimed by some -- without any reference to really reliable sources to support the view supposedly the uncontested conviction of all specialist.

This may be a little OR, you may just think about it: immigrants, particularly from certain areas/cultures, are extremely overrepresented in crime statistics (one can see from 2 up to 20 times overrepresentation depending on crime). Now, let's assume more people come in from these areas. Assuming that the native crime rate does not go down, what happens when more people come from these areas/cultures? Just deduction ... Oh, and btw., immigrant overrepresentation in crime doesn't disappear when socio-economic conditions are being controlled ... and the groups are so huge that statistically speaking, it would be folly to think that for some arbitrary reasons the newcomers are different from those who have come before. So you can't really explain it away.

This is the factual situation, as is made clear by reliable sources in this very article. And now, not censoring information that appears to contradict the narrative that no, immigration certainly doesn't cause more crime, without any OR claims (even if its hardly anything but conclusions of deductive logic, I admit, it's OR and has no place in wiki), people tell you with serious tone that "that's undue balance". Yes, that was the claim that has been made. But let's be serious ... --Raži (talk) 15:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Razi. At the very least, all of the censored statistics should be reinserted into the article. I can also likely compare the 1975 and 2015 statistics for other types of crime than rape. David A (talk) 18:30, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

WP:OR and WP:SYNTH are pretty clear on the matter. VR is completely correct. Ratatosk Jones (talk) 04:31, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

VR's argument was invalid. Let me repeat: The article did not make any statement considering the right interpretation of any of the statistics. And the statistics were referred in a context of Howoritz's response, which is certainly relevant, just to lay out the information about what Horowitz's was referring to. No OR, no SYNTH SYNTH_is_not_mere_juxtaposition.. Now, if you call something SYNTH, you should be able to lay out the precise reasons why it is, pointing out where exactly the SYNTH occurred and why it must be regarded as such. What_SYNTH_is_not#SYNTH_is_not_presumed. VR didn't do that, while I have laid out the reasons why we are not dealing with SYNTH. --Raži (talk) 13:12, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

• David A, "decided to initiate mass-immigration from the 3rd world"...if you cannot be neutral on an article talk page, perhaps Wikipedia is not for you. I suggest you stop with the tendentious language and the original research; surely there's another wiki where that sort of propaganda is encourages. I read your comments on statistics--they couldn't be more incorrect. You suggest that because someone mentioned those statistics (in a misleading context, for the sake of defending a right-wing position, etc.) they should be mentioned in this article. No, that is not how this works: facts are relevant because reliable sources say they are, not because some mouthpiece says they are. Nor should they simply be stuck in "so the reader can make up their own mind"--citing some out-of-context stat and then letting the reader make up the mind you have carefully prepared for them, that's the job of other outlets. I hope that you will be able to agree with the basic purpose of what Wikipedia is; if not, I foresee a topic ban to keep you out of areas where you abuse Wikipedia for your political purposes. Drmies (talk) 14:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, all that I have been arguing for is that raw statistics should be favoured over opinions. I can try to be more neutral in my writing, but I have read thousands of news articles about how Sweden's social institutions are completely falling apart, despite the highest taxes in the world to finance them, how crime is running rampant, several extremely disturbing opinion poll surveys, genocide on Christians in the Middle-East, etcetera.

The world is also besieged by an onslaught of different types of existential threats, from global warming, artificial intelligence, resistant diseases, bioterrorism, cyberterrorism, nuclear warfare, theocratic fascism, overpopulation, supervolcanoes, and so onwards.

As such, I feel extremely terrified, stressed-out, and helpless, and would prefer that I have the freedom of speech to express my concerns, especially given that I am autistic, and have very limited mental filters/am virtually unable to lie. David A (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

In addition, I work 63 hours a week as the most active bureaucrat for one of the world's most popular entertainment wikis, so I am very overexerted in general. David A (talk) 16:29, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you should spend your time on the other wiki, then. I cannot do much about this "onslaught" you signal, but I can help protect this wiki from thousands of supposed news articles, most of which, I'm going to guess, are copies of that silly story that ran on...Bishonen, what was that site? I have a little box on my talk page that you can borrow, to signal that you stand with Sweden. I'm sorry, but this is not a free-speech zone. Drmies (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

No, they are mostly articles in serious regular Swedish newspapers. Our country really is completely falling apart in terms of violent crime, housing, education, health care, police force, immigrant employment statistics, honour culture, high statistical support for jihadist organisations, and so onwards. It is extremely frustrating and depressing when the reality of our situation is trivialised to this extreme extent, simply because of a few opinions that run contrary to the statistics, and I am accused of thought crimes simply for reading lots of said news articles and statistics. But since this seems hopeless, I will drop the issue. David A (talk) 02:17, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Drmies, you're probably thinking of Avpixlat, we have a well-sourced stub about it. Yes, David A, it might be better to drop it. If you're too overexerted to find and supply some links to articles in serious regular Swedish newspapers that support, for instance, your statement that "the Swedish government decided to initiate mass-immigration from the 3rd world around 1975", it's quite inappropriate to wave vaguely at them on Wikipedia. Talkpages are not soapboxes. Bishonen | talk 04:16, 6 April 2017 (UTC).

I do not read Avpixlat. I read Göteborgs-Posten, Expressen, Svenska Dagbladet, Dagens Samhälle, Ledarsidorna, Nyheter Idag, Det Goda Samhället, and Tino Sanandaji's statistics blog. Anyway, here is the official government decision regarding the issue: http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/proposition/regeringens-proposition-om-riktlinjer-for_FY0326 David A (talk) 04:58, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I also subscribe to Nyhetsbubbla, and various journalists and experts on Twitter, who link to lots of foreign news articles. David A (talk) 07:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Various statistics that I have found for Sweden

Here are various statistics that I have found. Do with them as you wish:

Malmo, in Sweden, is the second most unsafe, and crime-infested city in Europe:

https://www.numbeo.com/crime/region_rankings.jsp?title=2017&region=150

It was decided to open Sweden for massive immigration from the 3rd world in 1975:

http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/proposition/regeringens-proposition-om-riktlinjer-for_FY0326

The amount of women in Sweden subjected to sexually related crimes went up with 70% between 2014 to 2015:

https://www.bra.se/bra/nytt-fran-bra/arkiv/press/2016-11-03-utsatthet-for-sexualbrott-har-okat-bland-kvinnor.html

There were over 480000 sexually related crimes against women in Sweden 2015:

http://www.bra.se/download/18.37179ae158196cb1721ac8/1478089201798/2016_Utsatthet_for_brott_2015.pdf

In 1975 only 421 rapes were reported to the police in Sweden:

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/2008-11-21-brottsutvecklingen-i-sverige-fram-till-ar-2007.html

To compare with 5920 the year 2015:

https://www.bra.se/bra/brott-och-statistik/valdtakt-och-sexualbrott.html

According to the Swedish police department, there are 55 extremely lawless areas in the country, and 186 in sum total. There were only 3 of them in 1990:

https://polisen.se/Global/www%20och%20Intrapolis/Rapporter-utredningar/01%20Polisen%20nationellt/Ovriga%20rapporter-utredningar/Kriminella%20natverk%20med%20stor%20paverkan%20i%20lokalsamhallet%20Sekretesspr%2014.pdf

http://www.dnv.se/nyheter/ny-rapport-utanforskapets-karta-en-uppfoljning-av-folkpartiets-rapportserie/

According to the leader of the ambulance drivers' union, Gordon Grattidge, the police, and other rescue workers, cannot enter such areas without being subjected to severe violent assaults, such as stone-throwing lynch mobs:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-truth-about-sweden/article/2007071

http://www.weeklystandard.com/video-head-of-ambulance-union-confirms-no-go-zones-in-sweden/article/2007000

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/773310/Swedish-medics-military-equipment-enter-no-go-zones-Ambulance-Drivers-Union

660000 immigrants are expected to apply for asylum to Sweden 2016-2020 in sum total:

https://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.2d998ffc151ac38715917594/1485556216677/Migrationsverkets+prognos+oktober+2016.pdf

11% of youths (non-Muslims were included in the survey) in the suburbs of Gothenburg admit to supporting Jihadism:

http://www.gp.se/nyheter/g%C3%B6teborg/studie-var-tionde-elev-st%C3%B6ttar-religi%C3%B6sa-extremister-1.3908356

80% of Muslim women in Gothenburg admit to live under the threat of honour culture:

http://www.gp.se/nyheter/göteborg/utbrett-hedersförtryck-mot-flickor-i-göteborg-1.3908432

A comparative study of criminal tendencies between people born in Sweden and abroad from 2005:

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/2005-12-14-brottslighet-bland-personer-fodda-i-sverige-och-i-utlandet.html

Further information about the vastly increased violent criminal activity in society since 1975:

https://www.morpheusblogg.se/2015/11/12/kriminaliteten-okar-visst/

According to the Swedish police department, the use of hand-grenades in Sweden among criminals is the highest in the world for countries not currently at war:

https://www.svd.se/svenska-attacker-med-granater-sticker-ut-i-varlden

A study about the extremely increasing antisemitism in Sweden:

http://kantorcenter.tau.ac.il/sites/default/files/PP%203%20Antisemitisms%20160608.pdf David A (talk) 10:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

What's your point? You appear to be posting links to various sources, some of which support your POV, others which you simply interpret to your liking. What this has to do with this article is beyond me.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

The point is that all of the actual available statistics paint a clear picture, but are systematically swept under the carpet, and replaced with unreliable personal opinions. David A (talk) 10:13, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Primary

We have a policy that says:

. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them.

I think we're getting to that point, with folks just adding raw stats from primary sources and not using secondary sources. We gotta start limiting that and use studies instead.VR _talk 06:35, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I think that we have the opposite problem, in that virtually all statistics for Sweden have been ignored in favour of unfounded opinion pieces. David A (talk) 12:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

But Wikipedia says we should use Secondary sources mostly and Primary sources only sometimes. Basing something off Primary sources starts to look like original research.VR _talk 06:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Immigration and crime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307202800/http://www.mit.edu/~westj/articles/JeremyWest_RacialBiasPolice.pdf to http://www.mit.edu/~westj/articles/JeremyWest_RacialBiasPolice.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:18, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Sweden

There is fairly solid scholarly evidence that immigrants are somewhat more likely to commit crime than Swedes (the average is a rate of 2, not 20). At the same time this higher average can be explained by socio-economic factors. The sources that attest to this are high quality English language academic sources (I'll put them in soon). So if a foreign language source contradicts this, I will politely ask for the both the text of the source and an explanation as to why this source can be considered reliable.VR _talk 06:59, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

An updated list regarding the situation in Sweden

Here are several relevant fact sources. Some of them should at the very least be important enough to include in the article:

It was decided to open Sweden for mass-immigration from the 3rd world in 1975:

http://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/proposition/regeringens-proposition-om-riktlinjer-for_FY0326

In 1975 only 421 rapes were reported to the police in Sweden:

https://www.bra.se/bra/publikationer/arkiv/publikationer/2008-11-21-brottsutvecklingen-i-sverige-fram-till-ar-2007.html

To compare with 5920 the year 2015:

https://www.bra.se/bra/brott-och-statistik/valdtakt-och-sexualbrott.html

The amount of women in Sweden subjected to sexually related crimes went up with 70% between 2014 to 2015:

https://www.bra.se/bra/nytt-fran-bra/arkiv/press/2016-11-03-utsatthet-for-sexualbrott-har-okat-bland-kvinnor.html

There were over 480000 sexually related crimes against women in Sweden 2015:

http://www.bt.se/sverige-varlden/480-000-sexbrott-mot-kvinnor-i-sverige-pa-ett-ar/

http://www.bra.se/download/18.37179ae158196cb1721ac8/1478089201798/2016_Utsatthet_for_brott_2015.pdf

At least 90% of all murders and attempted murders through gun violence in Sweden are performed by either immigrants or those with at least one immigrant parent:

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/vanligt-med-utlandsk-bakgrund-bland-unga-man-som-skjuter/

94.5% of all career criminals in Stockholm, Sweden, are either immigrants or have at least one immigrant parent:

http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/qs/gangen-inifran/brotten-skulderna-bakgrunden--sanningen-om-de-gangkriminella-i-stockholm/

According to the Swedish police department, there are 53 areas in the country where the police has lost control of crime and religious extremism/Islamism. 23 of them are extremely criminal. There are at least 186 social alienation areas in sum total. In 1990 there were only 3 of them:

https://polisen.se/Global/www%20och%20Intrapolis/Rapporter-utredningar/01%20Polisen%20nationellt/Ovriga%20rapporter-utredningar/Kriminella%20natverk%20med%20stor%20paverkan%20i%20lokalsamhallet%20Sekretesspr%2014.pdf

http://www.westmonster.com/8-new-areas-added-to-swedish-police-no-go-zone-list/

http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/hemliga-listan-23-omraden-ar-nu-sarskilt-utsatta/

http://c1845.cloudnet.se/nyheter/utanforskapets-karta/attachment/23270-utanforskapets-karta-2014-05-27/

http://www.dnv.se/nyheter/ny-rapport-utanforskapets-karta-en-uppfoljning-av-folkpartiets-rapportserie/

According to the leader of the ambulance drivers' union, Gordon Grattidge, the police, and other rescue workers, cannot enter such areas without being subjected to severe violent assaults, such as stone-throwing lynch mobs:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-truth-about-sweden/article/2007071

http://www.weeklystandard.com/video-head-of-ambulance-union-confirms-no-go-zones-in-sweden/article/2007000

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/773310/Swedish-medics-military-equipment-enter-no-go-zones-Ambulance-Drivers-Union

According to the Swedish police department, the use of hand-grenades in Sweden among criminals is the highest in the world for countries not currently at war:

https://www.svd.se/svenska-attacker-med-granater-sticker-ut-i-varlden

There is a floating distinction between the jihadists and extremely violent criminals in Sweden:

https://www.dagenssamhalle.se/kronika/flytande-graens-mellan-gaengen-och-jihadisterna-33125

The number of physical assaults against boys between the ages of 15 and 17 in Sweden have increased by 68% during the last two years:

http://www.tv4.se/nyheterna/klipp/ungdomar-tappar-f%C3%B6rtroendet-f%C3%B6r-r%C3%A4ttsv%C3%A4sendet-3911550

The number of sex crimes in Swedish festivals went up by 1000% in 2016 compared to the previous year, right after taking in 203000 immigrants in 2015:

http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/brottscentralen/tjejer-ofredas-pa-grona-lund-helt-oacceptabelt-/

The police of Sweden reports that: "Society is not equipped to deal with this great a number of criminal actors (...) Police and other social actors lack the ability to handle the problem."

http://www.expressen.se/ledare/rikspolischefen-har-tappat-kontrollen/

The number of genital-mutilated women in Sweden are several times higher than 38000:

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/mangdubbelt-fler-konsstympade-kvinnor-an-man-trott

Sweden will take in 374000 relatives to previous immigrants during the next 4 years:

http://www.svd.se/i-asylkrisens-spar-374-000-anhoriga-vantas

The number of immigrants that will apply for asylum to Sweden 2016-2020 in sum total:

https://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.2d998ffc151ac38715917594/1485556216677/Migrationsverkets+prognos+oktober+2016.pdf

10000 immigrants arrive in Italy every week, and mostly want to go to northern Europe:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/02/italy-calls-european-countries-take-migrant-ships-country-struggles/

355000 Swedish elderly live below the poverty line: http://www.expressen.se/dinapengar/355-000-lever-under-gransen-for-fattigdom/

11% of the youths in the suburbs of Gothenburg admit to supporting Jihadism (non-Muslims were included in the survey):

http://www.gp.se/nyheter/g%C3%B6teborg/studie-var-tionde-elev-st%C3%B6ttar-religi%C3%B6sa-extremister-1.3908356

80% of Muslim women in Gothenburg admit to live under the threat of honour culture:

http://www.gp.se/nyheter/göteborg/utbrett-hedersförtryck-mot-flickor-i-göteborg-1.3908432

There are thousands of Jihadists in Sweden:

https://www.svd.se/sapo-tusentals-radikala-islamister-i-sverige/om/hotet-mot-sverige

https://www.thelocal.se/20170616/thousands-of-violent-extremists-in-sweden-security-police/

The EU admits that extremely few of the immigrants to Europe have been actual refugees, and are rather there for economic reasons:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/819670/Migrant-crisis-EU-admits-hardly-any-people-arriving-Italy-refugees-deportations/

Germany admits that most of the immigrants almost completely lack education and work skills:

https://amp.ft.com/content/022de0a4-54f4-11e7-9fed-c19e2700005f

82% of immigrants to Sweden who claim to be underage are really adults:

https://www.rmv.se/aktuellt/det-visar-tre-manader-av-medicinska-aldersbedomningar/

Over 90% of the young 3rd world immigrants are men, not women:

http://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.7c00d8e6143101d166d1aab/1446451028489/Inkomna+ans%C3%B6kningar+om+asyl+2015+-+Applications+for+asylum+received+2015.pdf

A report about the intense antisemitism in the Muslim communities of Sweden and Europe:

http://kantorcenter.tau.ac.il/sites/default/files/PP%203%20Antisemitisms%20160608.pdf

A study about antisemitic violence in Europe. The Muslims and the far left are the by far greatest perpetrators:

http://www.sv.uio.no/c-rex/english/news-and-events/news/2017/antisemitic-violence-in-europe.html

The Muslim Brotherhood has a very strong foothold and influence in Sweden:

https://www.msb.se/Upload/Kunskapsbank/Studier/Muslimska_Brodraskapet_i_Sverige_DNR_2107-1287.pdf

It is also considering to move its international headquarters to Sweden:

https://ledarsidorna.se/2017/03/is-the-muslim-brotherhood-moving-to-sweden/

David A (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

A new study for Germany

Asylum seekers to Germany are 7.3 times as likely to commit crimes as the average citizen:

http://www.epochtimes.de/politik/welt/ines-laufer-die-fluechtlings-kriminalitaet-zwischen-fakten-und-medienluegen-a2132375.html David A (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Number of Refs.

Do we really need 21 references for one sentence? Looks like it should be trimmed down to 3-5 tops. PackMecEng (talk) 17:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, on contentious issues, lots of citations are needed, especially when it concerns research. They can be combined into a megacite. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 09:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

No, it is dang near the very definition of WP:OVERCITE. Yes it is contentious, but that is why I mentioned 3-5 tops instead of the standard one or two. 21 sources for one sentence adds nothing above the normal 3-5. PackMecEng (talk) 13:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:OVERCITE recommends citation merging for contentious and controversial topics.Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I was going by the examples given near the end. Where they have contentious material with way to many citations and trim them down significantly. Such as 54 citations was turned into 3 citations and 17 was trimmed to 3. Also merging is recommended when a large range of sources offer beneficial information or to avoid long term edit wars, either of which is not the case here. PackMecEng (talk) 18:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I think the studies cited do offer a large range of beneficial information. Each study is different and warrants a sentence of its own. For anyone looking to learn more about the relationship between immigration and crime, this Wikipedia article definitely delivers. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 19:59, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

But they are not significantly different. Heck several have the same writers. Just a couple of them and you have a full idea of what is going on. PackMecEng (talk) 02:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Snooganssnoogans: Perhaps we can start with removing the sources that are by the same author. After that look if bundling is appropriate the sources left. PackMecEng (talk) 15:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Unless the author is republishing the same study in a different outlet (e.g. republishing an article as a chapter), those studies shouldn't be removed, as they are different. People who study the relationship between immigration and crime are likely to have an interest and expertise in the topic, which leads them to publish multiple studies on it. The studies in question are different, otherwise they wouldn't be published. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Well dang it Snoog I think we are at an impasse here. I will not change anything, but hopefully someone else can chime in. PackMecEng (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

France paragraph, 'Islam dans le prison' is an unreliable source.ScrittoreMagrolino (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Data is his book isn't sourced and not official. http://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-radio/le-vrai-du-faux/60-des-detenus-francais-sont-musulmans_1770701.html ScrittoreMagrolino (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Immigration and crime. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314011946/http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20000822xx3 to http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20000822xx3
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.elsevier.nl/web/Nieuws/Nederland/236094/Schokkende-cijfers-criminaliteit-Marokkanen-Rotterdam.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029191913/http://www.omi.wa.gov.au/resources/clearinghouse/Ethnic_Minorities_and_Crime.pdf to http://www.omi.wa.gov.au/resources/clearinghouse/Ethnic_Minorities_and_Crime.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Editing help needed for the Sweden section

Hello.

I would greatly appreciate if somebody could please check through the following references, to see if any of them can be inserted into the Sweden section. Thank you.

According to Dagens Nyheter, at least 90% of all murders and attempted murders through gun violence in Sweden are performed by either immigrants or those with at least one immigrant parent.

According to Expressen, 94.5% of all members of career criminal gangs in Stockholm, Sweden, are either immigrants or have at least one immigrant parent.

According to the Swedish police department, there are 53 socially vulnerable areas in the country, of which the ones wherein they have lost control of crime and religious extremism recently increased from 15 to 23.

According to the leader of the Swedish ambulance drivers' union, rescue workers cannot enter such areas without police protection.

The staff of the Swedish Migration Agency have reported 2875 incidents of threats or violence from January to September 2017.

According to the Swedish Security Service (SÄPO), there are thousands of Islamic terrorists in Sweden, and it receives an average of 200 reports of planned terrorism every day.

3 times as many cases of terrorism financing were reported in Sweden 2017 compared to 2016.

References

David A (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

 No action Not a legitimate COI edit request. Spintendo  ᔦᔭ  20:19, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Issues in the Sweden section

I think we have some work to the to balance section about Sweden. What is established is that immigrants are overrepresented and that violent crime is increasing, the reason behind this is not settle as the article would suggest. The article only give perspectives from a sociology perspective, but Jerzy Sarnecki is not the only one who have an opinion about this subject. Tino Sanandaji has been writing extensively about this subject and it would be good if other perspectives where added.

Why is Sweden the only section that have the subsections recent and past immigration? Why is 2013 consider past immigration? There is no such distinction to be made.

Why does it say that crime rates overall has risen, while crime rates overall are stable overall, but vary depending on the type of crime? --Immunmotbluescreen (talk) 10:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

The text is reliably sourced. In fact, academic articles are considered the highest-quality sources on Wikipedia. Your concerns are just WP:JUSTDONTLIKE. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 11:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

You have proven beyond any reasonable doubt that you have not understood the scientific method or the use of sources. Sociology is not the only academic field. Economist Sanandaji is one perspective, psychiatrist Sariaslan is another. You should read the book Fashionable Nonsense to get a basic understanding of the validity of social sciences. Although academic journal is a good source (although not perfect as it is behind paywall), books and news are also allowed sources on Wikipedia. You can have both academic journals as source for one statement and other sources to back up different statments--Immunmotbluescreen (talk) 13:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Australia

Snooganssnoogans Wikipedia is not censored.

The ABS figures on incarceration rate are per 100,000 from table 22 in 4517.0 Prisoners in Australia, 2017 - http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4517.0~2017~Main%20Features~Country%20of%20birth~9

quoting explanation

IMPRISONMENT RATES

53 Imprisonment rates enable comparison of prisoner populations across states and territories at a point in time, as well as over time. Prisoner rates are expressed per 100,000 adult population, in accordance with international and state and territory practices. 54 Rates for the adult prisoner population are calculated using the estimated resident population (ERP) for each of the states and territories, and total Australia (see Australian Demographic Statistics (cat. no. 3101.0)) as at 31 March of the relevant calendar year. All estimates and projections for the Australian Capital Territory exclude Jervis Bay Territory. Estimates and projections for Australia exclude the external territories of Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, with the exception of table 22. For table 22, data on country of birth excluding external territories are not available. As a result imprisonment rates by country of birth may be slightly lower than would be the case if these data were available. 55 From 2016, all crude imprisonment rate data are based on the perturbed population counts in these tables (see Explanatory Notes paragraphs 108–110). Prior to 2016, data for crude imprisonment rates were based on unperturbed data. As per previous years, age standardised imprisonment rates are calculated from unpertubed data. 56 The formula for calculating the imprisonment rate is as follows:

57 The formula for calculating the ratio of two imprisonment rates is as follows:

58 In June 2013, the ABS 'recast' the historical ERP data for the September 1991 to June 2011 period, as a response to a methodological improvement in the Census Post Enumeration Survey. As a result, the rates per 100,000 adult persons in the Prisoner Census have been recast, and all now use final ERP data based on the 2011 Census of Population and Housing.

59 For population estimates and information on the methodology used to produce the ERP, see Australian Demographic Statistics (cat. no. 3101.0).

This is available in the standard ABS data explanation. -- Callinus (talk) 12:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC) @Snooganssnoogans:

Donald Trump

Snooganssnoogans Per edit comment, how is Donald Trump an authoritative expert on crime in Europe? Which reports on immigrant crime in Northern Europe has he authored? AadaamS (talk) 19:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

reverts by Snooganssnoogans

Snooganssnoogans Per this revert, if you find a published report by M. Gerell per WP:SCHOLARSHIP with the same claims after he completed the PhD (or as part of the PhD thesis) you are welcome to use that. AadaamS (talk) 15:40, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

You have argued that Gerell is not a expert on this, despite the fact that the newspaper of record cites him. And despite the fact that he has at least nine peer-reviewed scholarly publications in criminology, including several specifically about crime in Sweden. The notion that he's not an expert is absurd. Feel free to take this to the RS noticeboard. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Was he a PhD student at the time of the interview? It said so in the WP article. You are welcome to use his published research. AadaamS (talk) 15:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

should the Sweden section be in chronological order?

Should the Sweden section list paragraphs in chronological order? AadaamS (talk) 05:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Note

The edit also involved a dispute with citing M. Gerell, has already been resolved by removing the WP:SPECULATION in this edit. AadaamS (talk) 05:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Survey

• Yes - it is unclear how the recent/past division in the Sweden section was arrived at.

• Which source says what's "in the past"?
• How is "the past" defined?
• Also, a chronological order can be applied consistently, as opposed to the current order where years appear randomly. AadaamS (talk) 05:57, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

• No, use newest to oldest - We should start with the most recent studies and recent time periods covered, and then cover later periods and older studies. It is not reasonable to assume that most readers want information on crime in Sweden in the 70s or 90s ahead of contemporary data. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 10:04, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
  • What you have repeatedely reverted to is not a "newer to older" order, it is a random order especially in the artifially labelled "past" section. AadaamS (talk) 11:45, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
• AadaamS pinged me at WP:VPM. I have the following thoughts:
  • The ordering of 1990s/2000s/2010s, which AadaamS prefers, is chronological, and so is the ordering of Recent immigration/Past immigration, which he does not prefer. These are both "chronological" orders.
  • The main difference between them is whether you order it according to when the immigrants arrived or according to when the research papers were published. AadaamS prefers ordering the information according to publication dates. I prefer ordering it according to when the immigrants arrived, mainly on the premise that there seem to be relevant differences in immigrants who arrived in 1970 vs immigrants who arrived in 2015, but that there's not likely to be significant differences in whether an academic paper was published in 1999 or 2001. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Many thanks for your input, WhatamIdoing. I agree that ordering according to when they arrived is a workable solution. In particular I think the "past" section has paragraphs which appear in an inconsistent order. Also it's unclear who/what decides what is "past" or "recent", making the division of the section arbitrary. Using decades would be consistent. Side note: Also as you note, immigration to Sweden has changed characteristics over the decades, with predominantly labour migration in the earlier decades and asylum claimants/family reunification in the later decades. AadaamS (talk) 06:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
      • I think that change in characteristics (more or less from "economic refugees" to "war refugees") would be a workable distinction between "past" and "recent". WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:54, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Political consequences

"Muslim immigrants living in states with the sharpest increase in hate crimes also exhibit: greater chances of marrying within their own ethnic group; higher fertility; lower female labour force participation; and lower English proficiency." The possible consequences are not backed up by data. May anyone dig into that suggestions? Harsher punishments can work, if those are accepted by all participants. In particular I am unsure how assimilation is measured and how big and centralized the communities were before and after the hate crimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.63.68.205 (talk) 10:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Is Donald Trump an expert on crime in Sweden?

Per this edit, no WP:RS show that Donald Trump is an expert on Sweden and that his comments do not belong among other comments in the section about Sweden, since all others cited are experts in one form or another (Swedish Institute is debatable as they are experts at public relations, not criminology). ENWP is under no obligation to report unsubstantiated WP:RUMORS. AadaamS (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Pointless news crap unrelated to main topic.....agree not sure how some non experts opinion should be even here....just USA spam

--Moxy 🍁 19:53, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

New Swedish literature review / undue US weight in lead

A new literature review on Nordic research and statistics between 2005 and 2019 has been published by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå). Available here (in Swedish). According to its findings, people born in a foreign country are heavily over-represented in serious crime and 2nd generation immigrants are more likely to commit crimes than 1st generation. Though it has a lot more because it's 80 pages long.

I don't have time for more work right now, so just posting this here, but this source could be used to condense the Sweden-section and add a more global view in the article lead. Currently the lead section has an undue weight on the US metastudy: A meta-analysis of 51 studies from 1994–2014 on the relationship between immigration and crime in the United States found that overall immigration reduces crime, but the relationship is very weak --Pudeo (talk) 12:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Italy

There is no reason to remove a report on rape statistics in Italy just because it is incomplete, or we may as well not even have a page called Rape statistics because they are pitifully underreported in every country on Earth. I point to attention that this page already reports on rape statistics in other countries, none of which will be full and truly representative. Source #82 on Finland [2] discusses similarly why some offences may be reported and others not, depending on whether the offender was known to the victim or not. I made sure to include from the source that the percentages of foreigners reporting and being arrested for rape is about equal - the sources do not support a "they're raping our women" narrative.

So I don't see what this page is for. Is it just a dumping ground for raw figures, and not what the sources have said to explain the figures? Would it be OK for the Race and crime page to just say that more black people are per capita arrested and jailed in the US, without explaining what different sources say about why? Wallachia Wallonia (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

This is about this edit. All sources are judged in context, and we should summarize context provided by sources. Since this article is about "immigration and crime" as a whole, using these two relatively short news sources for specific details about a specific subset of crime during a specific time-frame is not an accurate summary for this article. Both sources go to lengths to explain that rates of sexual assault are extremely difficult to accurately measure, for multiple reasons. Presenting a couple of specific percentages, for one specific year, is false precision, since all of these sources acknowledge that these numbers are not accurate, and are significantly less accurate than other categories of crime. The first source specifically mentions that domestic violence, which typically also includes sexual violence, is especially under-reported, and this category is overwhelmingly more likely to involve Italian citizens. Using a source for one isolated detail, while ignoring important context from the same source, is not appropriate.

The loaded comparison to race and crime is not productive. Grayfell (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Category:Immigration and crime has been nominated for discussion

Category:Immigration and crime has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Apokrif (talk) 00:57, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 March 2021 and 7 June 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vanessajibarra.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Undue weight on the USA

Why does this page puts so much effort into talking about the USA I know Wikipedia especially the English one is biased but this is too much even for you guys 87.103.30.241 (talk) 16:04, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Detail about studies in certain countries

I don't know about other countries but in France it's forbidden to do a study regarding using ethnicity as data. And if someone does it anyways, most people will say it's racist without even reading about it or knowing the conclusion. But, there's still reports of crimes in Newspapers and TV. I don't know personally if it's exactly true but if we only listen to those reports, a lot of the crimes are made by immigrants, maybe most crimes. Also, in France, we have the feeling that the police lost its power. If you're robbed or even raped, most of the time the culprit, especially if he's young or an immigrant, will walk free after a couple of days without a trial, and even if there's a trial, some of them will not be condemned for the most ridiculous reasons (for example, the taxi rapist in France a few years ago was released and the only apparent and given reason was that the rapes occured 6 years ago, he had a child and it's so sad to destroy a family like that...: https://rmx.news/france/france-shocked-as-convicted-iranian-serial-rapist-prepares-to-walk-free-even-after-female-victim-makes-personal-plea-on-video-to-keep-him-behind-bars/ ;you can find maybe more detailed articles elsewhere and there's a lot of other crimes that had similar conclusions).

If you're interested in knowing for example every crime that happens related to women, you can follow Collectif Nemesis on Instagram, sadly, there's daily reports about it. And just because they mention the origins of the assailant (european, or immigrant), they're treated as racists...

For Germany, you can see the state of the justice and police system with the just the New Year's Eve from Cologne in 2015-2016. 1500 women assaulted and only 200 found suspects with only 4 condemned with a maximum of 1 year and 10 months, on which the culprit appealed (I think he never went to jail...)

I have the impression that the person who wrote the article only searched for studies without knowing that there isn't any in some Europeans countries and stopped around here... 90.3.201.184 (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

reference number 164 non-existent

Tried to click on "After Trump comments, the reality of crime and migrants in Sweden". France 24. 20 February 2017. Retrieved 9 April 2017." but the source page does not exist anymore. Wimpy acrosstheuniverse (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

The article is irrelevant

The latest study is a DECADE old! As is, this article is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.29.185 (talk) 15:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

OECD result

The lede includes the following statement

“ A 2023 study of 30 OECD countries found no statistical link between immigration and crime. ”

This is technically true but there are other issues with it. The lead should summarise the article in a neutral way. Why do you think that this article published in a relatively low-impact Croatian journal (Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja) represents the scholarly consensus? Alaexis_¿question? 21:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

It has 26 citations in the past year which is notable but that may be a better use of an 'additional sources needed' flag Superb Owl (talk) 21:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Europe

Currently the Economist's article is used to support the following statement in the lede

“ In Europe, there is also little connection between immigration and crime despite claims by some right-wing parties. ”

The Economist is a newspaper and not a peer-reviewed journal. It's generally a reliable source and normally it wouldn't be much of a problem. However in this case I believe we need a better source. The Economist article was published 6 years ago and a lot of research has been produced since then. Some of it is mentioned in the article, some of it isn't (just a couple of examples arriving to different conclusions [3] [4]). So I believe that we need to use a newer scholarly source for such sweeping statements, and if it's not available we should be more cautious. Alaexis_¿question? 21:38, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

The first is a primary source just of Germany (2015-2016) and the second a primary source just of refugees from Syria in Turkey - WAY too specific to make or dispute any generalizations. If you have reliable secondary sources that are more recent and contradict The Economist, that would be really helpful context. Superb Owl (talk) 21:52, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

These are secondary sources ("thought and reflection based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event") and not primary ones ("original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved").

Again, a 6-yo newspaper article is not a great source for the current scholarly consensus. If we don't have good sources for that we should simply not say anything. Alaexis_¿question? 21:56, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Just took it out of WP:Voice for now as you are right that we should be careful to make generalizations on one source. But it is still the best non-US source we have and so I think it belongs in the lead
And those are still primary sources with very limited scope of study - way too narrow to include in a lead or inform this conversation. Maybe worth including in the body, but even then a meta-analysis is what we really need Superb Owl (talk) 22:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

No, I'm absolutely not suggesting to include the sources I've mentioned in the lede (even though they are not primary). I doubt that a 2018 newspaper article is the best we've got, let me try to find better sources. Alaexis_¿question? 06:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Primary sources and synthesis

@Zilch-nada, the article before my bold edits that you have attempted to revert, was using lots of improper WP:synthesis of primary sources to make broad arguments.
Instead, I replaced (or flagged) those primary sources (which were not necessarily reliable sources that were also not as current as would be ideal) with secondary WP:Reliable sources that make more global claims and are more WP:verifiable.
I am really confused as to what the disagreement is about and extremely confident in the edits I made. Can you be more specific as to what your issues are with these edits? Superb Owl (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

For instance, the source of Cormier states that immigrants are less like to commit crimes in just about every country. Whereas, we have country-by-country sources showing immigrants committing more crime. It is not SYNTHESIS to doubt the former; there is an outright contradiction in sources.

A says: Just about no countries.

B, C, D, and so on: examples of countries that do - that is a direct, not indirect, negation.

My reverting was because you substantially changed every and all substance of the notion of a mixed relationship, and replaced them with describing them as having no relationship. That is an incredibly substantial different article, you must admit?

I am doubtful of most of the current wording. I think at least Cormier's source should be removed, at least in lede via WEIGHT. Zilch-nada (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zilch-nada, which countries have reliable secondary sources (such as meta-analyses) saying that immigration increases crime? When I found this article it cited maybe 2 primary sources from 2 different countries from 20 years ago that showed some correlation, not causation. That certainly should not be in the lead, and certainly not synthesized to make any broader claims outside of those studies.
Cormier is a secondary source. I agree it would be helpful to see what he is referencing more specifically and will add that. I can keep finding more secondary sources, but have not found one so far that claims a significant link between the two despite the suggestion made by this article or specific sections in it (e.g. Sweden, Denmark and waiting for verification of Finland, the other country cited in the former lead that was being used to make a claim that so far has not held up well). Superb Owl (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

The individual sources of countries, such as Sweden, etc., indicate higher rates of crime. Now, I understand that it is wrong to extrapolate - synthesise - that Europe as a whole is like that - or indeed any causation; of course I understand that. But this article puts particular and excessive emphasis, for example, on the United States in the lede. There are nearly 200 countries, and 10s if not 100s of millions of immigrants globally. Why then does this article emphasise in the lede that the United States of all countries shows no relationship? So my idea would be not to refer to any one country in particular unless other countries are mentioned. It seems very US-centric just to include the US. Zilch-nada (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The U.S. has the most reliable data and so is given more prominence in the lead. If you have great meta-analyses and secondary sources of Europe (similar population size to US) then that would deserve equal weight in my opinion.

You still need to prove that Sweden indicates higher rates of crime since the only secondary source I have found says it does not. I am reverting the last 4 edits, which all appear POV. If you have reliable sources that I am not seeing, then yes, we can make some of the changes that have been made but otherwise it is not supported by the evidence. Superb Owl (talk) 17:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

You clearly haven't seen my edits then. Some were simple reordering. Zilch-nada (talk) 17:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The first sentence/paragraph of a long section like Sweden was a good recent reliable summary of the data. That should go first.
I have not had time to sift through all the sources below it, but the ones I have made it to have not all been reliable or reliably summarized. I can do that now as it clearly needs some work as has much of this article Superb Owl (talk) 17:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

No, Lindberg describes the general discourse and states that it's wrong (without much elaboration), whereas the next sentences describes the actual meat of the article; "Those with immigrant background are over-represented in Swedish crime statistics". That's much more of a summary. Zilch-nada (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Uh... Those with immigrant background are over-represented in Swedish crime statistics. Research shows that socioeconomic factors, such as unemployment, poverty, exclusion language, and other skills explain most of difference in crime rates between immigrants and natives.

Immigrants are over-represented, as described in these sources = higher rates of crime among immigrants. Also, that is an important distinction. We need to distinguish between immigration's effect on the overall crime rate with the rates of crime associated with immigrants. Both evidently appear to be relevant. Zilch-nada (talk) 17:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Correlation does not equal causation. Causation studies are more relevant than correlation studies. They should have priority, especially when correlation is often used to imply causation Superb Owl (talk) 18:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Causation of immigrants committing more crime is literally explained there? You seem to be focused on immigration's effect on the overall crime rate (say causation A) as opposed to rates of crime associated with immigrants (say causation B). Causation B is quite literally what I just quoted. This article is more than merely about (1.) immigration's effect on the overall crime rate, but also (2.) the crime rate among immigrants. Those are two relevant pieces of info. Zilch-nada (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Btw, I am not arguing Causation A which you accuse me of doing. I don't have sources for that, and never implied that immigration raised the overall rate of crime anywhere. Zilch-nada (talk) 18:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I am not saying you did, I am saying that is how what you wrote could easily be interpreted, which is why the ordering is very important here to say from the outset that causation has not been proven before listing correlation studies and statistics (which I agree are probably worth including) Superb Owl (talk) 18:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The "Worldwide" section implies that there is often a positive being immigrants and rates of crime "Even if higher crime is reported among immigrant communities, that could simply reflect a correlation..." The notion - and very often fact - of higher crime being reported among immigrants (regardless of their effect on overall crime, causation B) - do you seriously not think that (causation B as I described it above) - should be included at all in the lede? You have gutted almost every mention of B.

BTW, "simply reflect a correlation". Correlation in which way? Between immigration and overall crime (A), or immigrants and their respective crime rates (B)? Because the former - as you have already described - doesn't show much causation - but the latter, as the "Worldwide" section states, describes the causation (B) of immigrants committing higher crime rates; i.e., due to disproportionately locate in deprived areas where crime is higher (because they cannot afford to stay in more expensive areas) or because they tend to locate in areas where there is a large population of residents of the same ethnic background. So a causation is described that explores often higher rates of crime among immigrants. So why gut any reference to that? Zilch-nada (talk) 16:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out - I have tried to clean that up the 'Worldwide' section a bit to make it clearer and more organized. I agree it should have some mention in the lead. I think we add a paragraph summarizing correlations as well as 'perceptions' section. Am feeling more comfortable in moving forward after finally getting around to organizing 'Worldwide' section a bit better Superb Owl (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree that there is no reason to only mention the US in the lede. I'm not sure that "the U.S. has the most reliable data" and we should not assume that the US is the only country that matters, or is a typical one. Alaexis_¿question? 21:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

The OECD study covers most of the ones with good data in this article (and some with less high-quality data). Bigger countries tend to have bigger sample sizes and better data, though not always. The U.S. is intended as an example to illustrate the OECD study findings but there is certainly room to swap out two of those examples with other countries' studies Superb Owl (talk) 23:35, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

My concern is that the US and EU experience seem to be quite different. Alaexis_¿question? 21:57, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

I am sure there are differences but do not see any evidence of that in reliable secondary sources so far Superb Owl (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

The big difference is that in the US the migrants generally commit fewer crimes than natives whereas elsewhere it's the other way around generally. See the Immigration and Crime: An International Perspective article that I've added which explicitly calls the US an exception.

At the same time it's true that studies haven't found a causal link between migration and crime even in the countries where migrants commit more crimes.

Scholarly sources like this one offer a more nuanced picture and we should use them rather than newspaper articles. Alaexis_¿question? 09:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

References

Verification needed tags - Denmark

They were added en masse with no explanation in the reason parameter and no comments at the talk page. What are the reasons to doubt the sources there? Alaexis_¿question? 09:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

language, history of misuse of sources about Denmark in lead and elsewhere Superb Owl (talk) 19:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Little clarity on scope of this article

As I conversed above with @Superb Owl - who recently made massive changes in the article -, we seem to have different view of how the article should begin. Simply, the uncontroversial opening states,

• Immigration and crime explores whether there is a relationship between criminal activity and the phenomenon of immigration.

Now, that should quite clearly encompass a (A) potential relationship between immigration and overall crime rates - i.e., does a rise in immigration increase (causation) overall crime - or not. But I think it is also quite clear that "relationship between criminal activity and the phenomenon of immigration" also refers to, for instance, the rates of crime being greater - or lesser - in immigrant groups compared to other groups (B). The causation for this could be due to poverty, racism, police brutality, among other things, that, in some countries whereby immigrants commit higher rates of crime. So,

• A: Immigration and its effect on overall crime
• B: Rates of crime among immigrants, e.g., compared to other groups.

A and B are two clearly different yet necessary aspects of this article. But @Superb Owl got rid of references to the latter, describing it as correlation-and-not-causation. But that is a different scope; considering B does not consider the causation on overall crime, but the causations of immigrants comparatively committing higher-or-lower rates of crime. I.e., a different scope of causation. I don't see why the latter point should be excluded; i.e., "rates of crime among immigrants" and how it relates to "a relationship between criminal activity and the phenomenon of immigration". Zilch-nada (talk) 16:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I would suggest we first continue to work through the body to continue cleaning-up individual sections before focusing on the lead. There are still issues of synthesis, original research, and selectively citing articles in a misleading way. Superb Owl (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zilch-nada, both are in the scope of the article. Alaexis_¿question? 09:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I think we disagree on what the meaning of the correlation in immigrants being overrepresented in crime statistics means. It previously was implied to mean that immigrants commit more crimes by being given undue weight (and improper synthesis). I removed that misleading language and poor sourcing.
We all agree that we need to discuss how some countries have crime statistics with proportionately more immigrants, but the reason most studies cannot establish causation that immigrants commit more crimes is many and also need explaining in that paragraph (see Worldwide section for the long list of reasons why correlation does not equal causation). We are much closer to have sufficiently robust sections in the article to start attempting to summarize in the lead and am happy to engage in that now given where we are Superb Owl (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Attribution

I'm not sure the attribution is warranted here. But if it is, then it's much more warranted for an article in Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja (also an economic journal but much less prominent [5] [6]). Alaexis_¿question? 19:03, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough - let's put back in WP:Voice. Just double-checking on econ journal relevance
I changed attribution to 'A 2024 article.' It does not argue to be a definitive meta-analysis of studies but is a single analysis that reaches rather weak conclusions on a limited set of countries, finding effects mostly in smaller european countries. It also has trouble isolating variables or putting into broader context its findings, admitting as much. This is a useful primary source, but not one we should include in the lead with only 2 citations so far, neither of which evaluate the paper or its claims. The lead should be reserved more for meta-analyses (if we can find them) or conclusions supported in the individual sections. Superb Owl (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes sense. The low citation count doesn't mean much for a recently published article. If you can find a better article we can surely add it.

I'm sorry for repeating it, but it's not a primary source in the sense this term is used on Wikipedia (WP:PRIMARY): Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. Census is a primary source. A scholarly article that investigates a link between X and Y using various primary sources is a secondary source. Alaexis_¿question? 18:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

True it was published in 2024, but in 'winter 2024' meaning 8 months ago. The July 2022 article (25 months ago) from the less reputable journal has 26 citations already. Kinda hard to compare but hopefully we will get more anlaysis of their findings soon.
Disagree re: primary vs. secondary sources, per: "For example, a review article that analyzes research papers in a field is a secondary source for the research." Because they are conducting an original analysis of data (not analyzing much research), the claims about their findings of their analysis is primary in this context. A meta-analysis would be secondary. Superb Owl (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Charts

The charts listed in certain sections offer raw data that has not been peer-reviewed, no attempt has been made to isolate other causal variables or even contextualized for the variables that are not. These charts, in my opinion, provide undue weight to the narrative that immigrants create crime, which has yet to be proven. We should not have any charts that make that implication at all, but if we do, we should have more charts showing that crime has not increased due to immigration. Superb Owl (talk) 20:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Danish charts

Per WP:PRIMARY, such sources can be used on Wikipedia provided we do not interpret them ourselves and do not use them excessively. This is clearly not the case here, there are plenty of secondary sources in the section on Denmark which discuss this data. Alaexis_¿question? 20:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

and per WP:DUE they cannot if they overemphasize one position, especially when it is a minority view. Superb Owl (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The chart doesn't "overemphasize one position" and it's not a minority view. These are the numbers released by the Danish statistical service and there are no other numbers about the levels of crime by the country of origin in Denmark. Different scholars interpret these numbers differently and this is precisely what is discussed in the section.

Wikipedia is not WP:CENSORED. Alaexis_¿question? 19:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

These are raw data, not refined to isolate any variables or contextualize it. We can fill up a section with raw data but that is not the question that people want to know - they want to know whether immigration increase crime and if so by how much. Even if immigration does increase crime, there is a lot of evidence that the amount is not by as much as is implied by charts like that. That is why it is WP:UNDUE Superb Owl (talk) 19:56, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Alaexis I agree it's inappropriate to remove relevant charts sourced to government figures. JSwift49 12:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Marie and Pinotti

The article's conclusion is very straightforward

“ On one side, in most countries—with the notable exception of the United States—immigrants exhibit a disproportionate involvement in criminal activity compared to natives, as measured by the relative incarceration rate of the two groups. In addition, certain kinds of immigrants, including young and less-educated men and those with irregular legal status, display a much higher propensity to commit crimes than those with documented status. These factors would seem to suggest a positive link between immigration and crime. On the other side, studies designed to measure the effect of immigration inflow effects on local crime rates do not, in general, find any detectable causal effect of immigration on local crime rates ”

We shouldn't replace the conclusion with cherrypicked facts from the article. Alaexis_¿question? 19:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

The conclusion is what seems cherry-picked after looking at the data - it makes it sound like the US is the only outlier (what about NZ, AUS, UK, and the dozens you cannot see because of the chart clutter). The article does not even attempt to say how many countries fit this correlation that they found. It also does not try to contextualize the numbers in any more statistically significant way such as the percentage of people who live in countries where immigration is associated with crime. Denmark and Sweden are technically more countries (2) than the US even though their population is far less. There are many statistical issues with the conclusion and I do not think it should be given very much weight in Wikipedia. Superb Owl (talk) 20:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

This is your opinion. If there are reliable sources that dispute this finding, we can add them to the article.

I've added a note that other Anglo-Saxon countries also behave differently.

The chart shows the prison population and not crime rates, so you can't say that the conclusion is wrong based on it. In any case this is WP:OR (analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources). Alaexis_¿question? 20:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The prison population is the variable referred to in this assertion that they used to assess crime rates. I added that to the text to be precise - they did not evaluate crime rates, just prison populations. I hear you on wanting it rebutted by secondary sources but without being able to see the data, I do not want to put much weight on this paper. And as mentioned before, this article has not been around for more than a year and has not had time to be rebutted, included or excluded in other articles so it's premature to put a lot of emphasis on its original analysis. Superb Owl (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, I can nitpick pretty much any article in this field and find gaps there because it's not exact science and one can always find things the authors didn't consider.

I'll try to find more sources confirming this. Alaexis_¿question? 19:56, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it's appropriate from this article to mention both that while many studies have found immigration doesn't increase crime, immigrants in some countries exhibit a disproportionate amount of criminal activity as measured by incarceration; that's reflected by the body of the Wiki article, too. JSwift49 13:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Precise wording

Most studies find no significant impact. The qualifier "under certain circumstances" in the first quote clearly does not negate the very clear finding of 'most studies' in the second source as it does not make reference to how often these circumstances occur.

"Previous studies about the effect of immigration on crime show mixed results. Part of the literature finds the effects of immigration on crime in host countries to be close to zero in general ... Other studies tend to conclude that immigration increases crime under certain circumstances, particularly if immigrants have poor prospects on the labor market or if they face labor market restrictions."

"On one side, in most countries—with the notable exception of the United States—immigrants exhibit a disproportionate involvement in criminal activity compared to natives, as measured by the relative incarceration rate of the two groups. In addition, certain kinds of immigrants, including young and less-educated men and those with irregular legal status, display a much higher propensity to commit crimes than those with documented status. These factors would seem to suggest a positive link between immigration and crime. On the other side, studies designed to measure the effect of immigration inflow effects on local crime rates do not, in general, find any detectable causal effect of immigration on local crime rates. For example, all previous studies relying on the shift-share instrumental variable approach estimate crime elasticities close to zero in various countries, and we further confirm this result on new data across European countries and regions." Superb Owl (talk) 18:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The current phrasing seems to me like improper WP:SYNTH. One source says most, one source says it's mixed. But "most studies" aren't showing it has no impact 'unless under certain circumstances'. Many/most? studies show it has no impact, and others show it has an impact under certain circumstances.

I think 'many' is a fair summary of the current literature reviews. For now I'll change it to "most show it has no impact, and others show it does under certain circumstances," which is near-verbatim in the body. JSwift49 12:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Allegedly "Inflammatory Charges"

@Superb Owell, it must be noted that none of these changes are made without the backing of reliable sources; even if they are uncomfortable, uncomfortable facts are still facts, and that information, quite relevant to this page, needs inclusion. It cannot be said, in the lead, that (according to some singular, obscure researcher, of course) there is no correlation between immigration and crime, while later in the page it is revealed that the data is actually seriously conflicting between countries, with some countries seeing immigrant criminality that is overwhelmingly disproportionate. This is a flagrant violation of WP:weight when honestly evaluating the data, and though I will admit that my changes could be altered to some degree to achieve a more perfectly unbiased reflection of said data, I do defend the notion that some changes need to be made. What say you? JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 21:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

A lot of the sources you included were not WP:RS. For example, GB News, Remix News (which has been designated as linked to Russia [7]), Civilek (which appears to be heavily pro-Orban), testimony from one conservative European Parliament politician. WP:RSPSS is a good guide for which sources are usable.

That being said I agree that the lead could have been a more accurate reflection of the article as a whole and de Haas was given too much weight, so I moved him down to the body. JSwift49 14:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I was not aware of the ties of Remix or Civilek, nor was I aware that GB News is considered too partisan to be a reliable source. That being said, I included multiple sources for every claim so that at least one for each was comfortably factual and non-partisan.

Ultimately, my concern is not just that de Hass is given too much weight in the lead, but that sources which found little correlation between immigration and crime, sources which disproportionately use American data, which is not representative of this relationship worldwide, are overrepresented.

Some countries (Denmark, UK, Germany) clearly see a correlation, and others (United States, Canada) clearly don't. The lead should explicitly say this. JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 21:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I think "Immigrants are disproportionately represented in the prison populations of many Western countries, with the notable exception of the United States" captures this well. If you can point to a reliable secondary source that specifically says immigrants commit more crimes in some countries (rather than individual studies, whose results appear to be mixed), I think it could be added. JSwift49 12:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Here's prison populations for Denmark:

https://jurij-fedorov.medium.com/danish-crime-rates-per-nationality-9921acfb620

Here's a research paper detailing crime statistics by immigration status, and of some specific crimes, in Sweden:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338563093_Migrants_and_Crime_in_Sweden_in_the_Twenty-First_Century

These are biased sources, but what they are reporting is definitely true; just no other paper feels comfortable pointing it out:

https://thecritic.co.uk/fined-over-facts/

https://jungefreiheit.de/politik/deutschland/2022/anteil-auslaendischer-sextaeter/

The evidence is bountiful, if uncomfortable. JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 22:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Oops.

I recently made the edit[8] with the summary "Reducing WP:REFCLUTTER." I later realized I was logged out. StarkReport (talk) 13:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Notable people

In the regions sections of immigration and crime, are we allowed to include notable people in them? I am thinking of adding Kimberlee Singler in the UK section. She illegally immigrated to the UK after shooting her two kids and boxing her 11 year old daughter. ShawarmaFan07 (talk) 11:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)