Jump to content

Talk:Freedom of movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What about the Caribbean Community? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:C30D:3500:3DD7:8311:A78B:34A8 (talk) 08:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Taiwan not on here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.34.179.96 (talk) 08:57, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Peer Review of Initial Contribution

[edit]

Great progress on the article so far and I believe that the plans for further improvement will truly improve the quality of the article. Overall the additions do a great job of clarifying and expanding on certain points that were vague. The content is written from a neutral point of view and is, for the most part, backed up by reputable sources. I recommend adding a citation after every line to clearly indicate where each statement was found. Going forward, I think that restructuring the article by arranging the regional sections geographically and making the history section more coherent are a good plan. Perhaps you could also add a section on dialogue and viewpoints surround freedom of movement if there is any. Looking forward to your future edits! GHumphrey97 (talk) 03:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement Project

[edit]

I believe this article could be improved in a few ways: - Some restructuring: Section names are somewhat awkward, and I feel that the regional sections should be organized geographically, not alphabetically as some are not single countries. - The regional sections need to be expanded significantly and I feel some have some NPOV issues, I will seek to address as many of these as possible. - The history section seems disconnected from the rest of the article, I will attempt to make it more coherent.

Some sources I intend to use for this include:

Lia Karsten, & Willem van Vliet—. (2006). Increasing Children's Freedom of Movement: Introduction. Children, Youth and Environments, 16(1), 69-73. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.16.1.0069

Eileen, D. (2016). Freedom of Movement. Diplomatic Law. doi:10.1093/law/9780198703969.003.0024

Dowty, Alan. Closed Borders: the Contemporary Assault on Freedom of Movement. Yale University Press, 1989.

Bauböck, R. (2009). Global Justice, Freedom of Movement and Democratic Citizenship. European Journal of Sociology,50(01), 1. doi:10.1017/s000397560900040x

Ugur, M. (1995). Freedom of Movement vs. Exclusion: A Reinterpretation of the `Insider- `Outsider Divide in the European Union. International Migration Review,29(4), 964. doi:10.2307/2547734

Anghel, R. G. (2008). Changing Statuses: Freedom of Movement, Locality and Transnationality of Irregular Romanian Migrants in Milan. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,34(5), 787-802. doi:10.1080/13691830802106069

Towards Schengen: the Abolition of Internal Border Controls in Europe. (n.d.). Digital Borders and Real Rights,11-46. doi:10.1163/ej.9789004165038.i-568.13

I welcome any comments or suggestions on the issue!

Arcendeight (talk) 00:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Only within a state?

[edit]

Does this apply to inter-country movement too? - FrancisTyers 17:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Should mention Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amcfreely (talk • contribs)

Merge proposal

[edit]

Is there any difference between freedom of movement and freedom of travel? CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 10:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

None whatsoever - I'm all for the merge, under this title - I note that "freedom of movement" gets some 5 million Google hits, while "freedom of travel gets a paltry 68k (and "right to travel" gets 337k). bd2412 T 13:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article on this topic should be huge and FA-worthy - let's kick it up a notch! bd2412 T 13:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution

[edit]

Some material on this page was merged here from Freedom of travel; the edit history for such content can be found in the edit history of that page. bd2412 T 13:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I've merged the edit histories - which creates the illusion of a terrible edit war! bd2412 T 13:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Human right

[edit]

The intro refers to it as a human right, then defines it as a right belonging usually to citizens. Isn't this a contradiction in terms? A human right, I thought, is one held on the basis of being human rather than on citizenship. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 02:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting quandary - like most "human rights" - speech, religion, payment for labor - it requires a government to effectively guarantee its free exercise. In theory, non-citizens legally in the U.S. have as much right to travel from state to state (and to exit the country) as citizens. However, most people derive passports from their home country (and visas from the country to which they intend to travel. bd2412 T 02:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From Visa (document):
Some countries, such as the defunct Soviet Union, require that their citizens, and sometimes foreign travelers obtain an exit visa in order to be allowed to leave the country. Currently, foreign students in Russia are issued only an entry visa on being accepted to University there, and must obtain an exit visa to return home. Citizens of the People's Republic of China that are residents of the mainland are required to apply for special permits in order to leave the mainland, including to enter the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macao (and SAR residents require a Home Return Permit to visit the mainland). Saudi Arabia requires all resident foreigners, but not citizens, to obtain an exit visa before leaving the kingdom.
Food for thought. bd2412 T 02:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new sections

[edit]

New sections on Burma and Syria added. They're cited to the appropriate laws, however, since these nations are highly criticized for repressive regimes, they're also necessarily critical of restrictions on freedom of movement in said countries. All claims are referenced AFAICT. Anyone have any problems with the way the are? I could probably write a whole new page on the Syria freedom of movement laws, but decided to restrict it to the most relevant topics. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 08:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

by country/by region

[edit]

It should probably go back to by country. The EU section would apply to all EU member states. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 07:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

[edit]

I came here looking for information on The Free Movement, a rock band of the early '70s. A disambiguation page would be useful. Thanks! 66.17.118.195 14:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Bank/Israel

[edit]

Should West Bank be a sub-heading under Israel? The area is technically Israel's territory.Rivkid007 (talk) 04:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo

[edit]

The minorities in Kosovo mostly do not enjoy the freedom of movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.240.38 (talk) 16:18, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:British-passport.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:British-passport.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Topic of this article

[edit]

The topic of this article is very vague and it needs to be clarified. The lead states that it is about Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, but the rest of the article has elements ranging from Emepror Augustus to "Scholars Argued". Is anyone still watching this article? I am rather tempted to quickly stub it into something coherent. Heptor talk 10:20, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the title "freedom of movement" should be retained under its own Wikipedia entry. This is too important a concept to make it a subsection of something else (if that's what's being proposed). Making it clear upfront that the article is not just about Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights would be good though. Starchildsf (talk) 13:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


If anything it needs to be expanded. The lede certainly could be updated to reflect the current content but stubbing it is not appropriate. The concept is complex and there are different interpretations according to time and locale. Those viewpoints should be expanded not removed. Jadeslair (talk) 15:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, please expand and update it sooner rather than later. Right now it is all Original Research, and rather frivolous at that. The lede makes a claim that there is a concept within "Human rights" that can be referred to -- interchangably it seems -- as a Freedom of movement, mobility rights or as the right to travel. Then it claims that this right/freedom/concept is "expressed" in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And then it dumps the raw text of Article 13, for no apparent reason other than to function as a filler. I don't see much that is worth saving here. Heptor talk 22:13, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • We don't withdraw from important topics merely because they are broad and abstract, and therefore difficult to write about. We move forward with improving them. "Freedom of movement" gets over one hundred thousand Google Books hits, and "right to travel" gets over eighty thousand, so there are plenty of sources to work with. bd2412 T 01:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon the sarcasm, but most scholars argue that it is far better to publish nothing at all than to publish something of rubbish quality. Especially when that something is wrong and misleading. That being said, I think the lede has been improved significantly, and it is actually quite good now. Many thanks to BD2412 and Jadeslair. Heptor talk 20:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Freedom of movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

archive worked but was not needed Jadeslair (talk) 19:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Freedom of movement. 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:

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) 10:24, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Freedom of movement. 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:

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) 18:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Freedom of movement. 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:

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) 17:28, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion Plans

[edit]

Hello there! I have been taking a look at this article and am considering working to expand it as a part one of my university classes (the course page is viewable on my user page). I am thinking of expanding some of the broader sections, citing sources, and eliminating superflous content as well as expanding some of the less developed regional sections. If anyone has any thoughts or advice on how to edit this article moving forward I would greatly appreciate them! Arcendeight (talk) 04:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks! bd2412 T 04:04, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Freedom_of_movement&oldid=1194756696"