Talk:Immigrant surveillance

Untitled

Language in the lead paragraph should be smoothed out a bit. I think this will be easier to do once you have a more solid idea of what exactly you'll be discussing in the article.

Your "history" section follows the evolution of law regarding immigrant security, so I would would suggest making your title for this section reflect that more with something like "History of Immigrant Security Legislation" or something else to that effect. I also think you should discuss Japanese internment in this section. It was a significant event in regards to immigrant policy and surveillance. May also want to go into further detail on each of the laws/Acts you discuss and fully flesh out their impact on immigrant surveillance. Keep in mind that though your topic is so broad and has a lot to be potentially be discussed, you don't necessarily have to address every single piece of legislation that was ever passed. Use your discretion to determine which were the most significant (although I'm sure you already planned to do that). You could even break the section down even more if you wanted to and discuss laws and legislation in one part and then significant court cases in another. Just an idea.

I'm a litter confused about the two sections of immigrant surveillance. Is the "immigrant surveillance and law" section supposed to be a response to currently used methods of surveillance as described in the section above or is it justification for it? I think you have to be more clear on this with your title. Also, if you plan to discuss both, make two separate sections for them.

The "Controversies" section could tie into a section that discusses legal concerns regarding immigrant surveillance practices so they could probably be discusses together. You discuss some state legislation in Arizona in this section so you may want to clarify in you above sections that they refer to federal law (might not be necessary but just a thought). Again, just make sure you're explaining everything thoroughly and really making sure your points are clear. The language in this section is a little choppy at times, so as you write more, just be conscious of making everything flow.

MooCow1 (talk) 19:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Xkwhvzde. Peer reviewers: Obtusesquare.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Qewel Peer Review

It's so great to see how far the article has come!

It seems that most of the information is well-cited, and there are many links to other wikipedia articles relevant to your topic. In looking at your "Immigrant surveillance and law" and "Controversies" sections however, I feel that some of the information presented in the "Controversies" section could actually be moved to the section regarding law, such as the information on the passage of Arizona SB 1070. I see that you have a section on the methods used in immigrant surveillance, and I am wondering if there are other means of surveillance that are not technology-based that you will address in the article. If you do find such methods, I think it would be neat to further divide that section based on the different methods there are!

Qewel (talk) 21:26, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by MooCow1

I can tell you've been focusing on adding content to the article, which is good given how much you have to cover. Going forward, however, i think it is important for you to start going back and explaining some of the topics a little more. The History section is coming along nicely listing the significant laws that have been passed. I think you should consider organizing the information more by breaking it down into significant eras or something. I believe Naniette suggested doing different presidencies, or you could try different eras or whatever you think would be best. For surveillance methods section, again, I think it could benefit most from more detailed explanations. I'm still a little confused on your law section. Specifically, I'm not really sure what you're saying in the section about the fourth amendment. Does the fourth amendment not cover searches/seizures of undocumented immigrants or is it used to argue against these searches? Lastly, when discussing controversies, discuss all of the pro or "for surveillance" arguments together and then the con arguments instead of switching between them. it just makes things more clear and easier to follow. Overall, looking good. The article is coming along nicely. MooCow1 (talk) 05:42, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by Obtusesquare

-"Though the laws concerning surveillance and immigration vary by country, the increase of terrorist attacks has made the issue more prevalent" --> and then you begin your next section with a sentence that also uses the word "prevalent". Just to smooth out the article flow, maybe change one of the "prevalent" to a different word. -For the history section, maybe you should continue up to the modern time period (talk about the 9/11, US-Mexico border conflicts, etc - maybe do different subsections under different Presidencies as was suggested in lab last week): so give the history context in this section and only focus on the surveillance method in the next section so there are no redundancies -Immigrant Surveillance and Law looks like a promising start! I think this would be a good place to break it into different subsections of important decisions made in different cases (like one subsection for the Fourth Amendment, a diff section for another important case that set a precedent for immigration surveillance) -Maybe mention how Joe Arpaio was pardoned by Trump...and what this means for the tone of goverment+ immigration in this period (careful to be neutral here) -Overall, very well developed since last week! Great job! Just focus on expanding your sections and giving sufficient background as this is such a complex/political subject. Obtusesquare (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Qewel Peer Review 2

I really enjoyed seeing how far you’ve come in developing this article! Throughout your article, it looks like you’ve been very thorough with backing all of your information with citations, and the overall structure of the article is very easy to follow. Great job so far! I have a few suggestions moving forward. I think that the United States subsection under surveillance methods could benefit from being divided into smaller sections for the different surveillance methods. Your History section is super solid and detailed! I suggest stating somewhere in the McCarthyism subsection within what years this era took place however, just so that the context is made more obvious to readers. In your World War I subsection, it seems like the last sentence could use a citation. Qewel (talk) 07:36, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by Obtusesquare

-In the lead section, do you mean "states" instead of country? Since your focus is on the United States, I think you should include a sentence or phrase indicating that. -Some inconsistencies with using "non citizens" vs "non-citizens" -I really like the time period format you created for History! Super clear and easy to follow. -From reading that Japanese internment section, I was thinking maybe you can include a later section about if there were any formal government apologies/reparations made towards wronged immigrant groups/and whether or not if those addressed the privacy rights violated (did they destroy files, photos, any information stored, etc), not sure how to title this section though... -"limitation of communism" seems a bit awk, maybe use "curbing of communism" or a different word - In the Surveillance methods, it could be cool to include ways people can bypass/protect themselves against those technologies (how do people fool ground-radar, E-verify, etc) - The Fourth Amendment section looks awesome!

TLDR; Great job!!! You've developed this article a lot since last week and it looks like it's heading in a really great direction :) Obtusesquare (talk) 16:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by MooCow1

In the sentence "Surveillance also includes the requirement of immigrants carry certification to prove their citizenship," there is a "to" missing before "carry." The history section is looking good. I like the new organization for it. I think we mentioned something like this in lab last week, but whichever the case, since its primary focus is on legislation, you could name the section "Legislation History" or something else to that effect, but I don't think it's really a necessity, just depends on your personal preference. In the "state surveillance section," I think it can be helpful to make a greater distinction between refugee policy and illegal immigrant policy. Explain this idea more because as of now, it's a little unclear. I would rename the "Legislation" section to "Controversy" since that is essentially what the section is about. I think it is clear throughout the article that you are discussing legislation, so I think "Controversy" (or something like it) would be a more telling title for this section. Your section on controversy is the first place you really begin to dive into privacy issues, however, I think you can incorporate it more into the rest of the article. Overall, I think your main focus going forward should be to expand your sections. You have content in every section, which is good, especially since we are uploading to the mainspace this week, so now just keep adding. MooCow1 (talk) 22:30, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Qewel Peer Review

You’ve made great progress in expanding your article and adding content! The way you’ve organized your subdivisions of the article is really well-done and makes the readability of the article much easier. My main critique is that the subsection for post 9/11 might call for more examples of immigrant surveillance, considering that that era accounts for so many years after the attacks and most likely has many examples that can be referenced at this point in time. Overall though, the article is certainly ready for the mainspace, with the minor area of improvement being additions of more content throughout the article.There appears to be a lack of a source for the last sentence in the “Border Surveillance” section. Qewel (talk) 08:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Geminisweetheart (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Manofthewater (talk) 01:00, 10 October 2023 (UTC)