Talk:Migrants around Calais

Merge the three articles bearing on this topic...

At the moment of my (expanding and article-creating) edit of 4 July 2015, I ought to have mentioned that I also removed some information from the old version of Calais#Recent migrants-problem, but I forgot to mention that, and I apologize for that:

• “UK reported the number… increased year-on-year (2011-2014)”: that is being said in one source, but NOT directly linked to Calais, so I removed it. (But source BBC 2 July does return in my article, as ref 5);
• “sneak into a lorry carrying chocolate”: yes, but that did not bring them to England. (That source, BBC March 2015, does return in my article as ref 13.)

I hope, someone will take up the challenge to integrate, merge, the two articles and one article-section which now seem to cover largely the same events and topic: Migrants around Calais, Calais jungle and Channel Tunnel#Asylum and immigration. At the moment, and for some time coming, I don't have the time to do that myself. If all correct and relevant information gets put together in one complete article, then Channel Tunnel#Asylum and immigration can be replaced with a short summary, referring to that (new) main article. --Corriebertus (talk) 12:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree that some thought needs to go into the relationship between these articles. For what it's worth, I think that "Migrants around Calais" is a vague title. Would a Polish plumber living and working in Calais be included in the remit of this article? Clearly not, but the title fails to reflect this. What it's really about is a string of incidents regarding attempted migration to the UK, from people temporarily based in and around Calais. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

GregKaye, you've been editing these articles recently. Do you have any thoughts on this? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry. You make a good point but I don't see a great problem with the current title as, within current historical context, my crystalball tells me that people will probably know the topic by intuition. If editors would be interested in a broadening of article content but perhaps titles such as Migrant crisis in Calais or Calais migrant crisis might work. This uses commonly used reference particularly shown in Trends 2004-present and 2015. These titles may in a limited way express POV in that interpretations may be more on "welfare crisis for the migrants" rather than "local crisis in long term population growth due to migrants" and may take attention to current immediacies and away from the causative crisis situations in locations such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Eritrea. "calais" "migrant crisis" gets "About 742,000 results" while the same search to the end of 2013 got "About 205,000 results" However this may fit with headlinese. An editor may prefer "Migrant crisis in Calais" to "Migrant around Calais" just for the sake of title impact.

GregKaye 08:08, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Greg. I might formally propose an article move at some point, but will give some thought to your suggestions first. Does anyone have views on Corriebertus's suggestion about merging the articles? Cordless Larry (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I just created Calais migrant crisis, and was, at that time, unaware that this page existed. I agree a merge would be a good idea, perhaps to the page I created. Everymorning (talk) 20:01, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

I have done a little work such that Calais jungle now relates to the specific 2015 jungle; Migrants around Calais, which lists the various camps around Calais, some of which have been called 'jungle', gives a specific link to Calais jungle in its section for that jungle; and Calais migrant crisis gives better differentiation between these various camps and the specific more notable jungle of 2015. In my opinion I have untangled the two jungle articles such that these three articles are now sufficiently differentiated to exist together, at least enough for the time being until we create a more permanent solution, if such a solution is now even needed. -Lopifalko (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I disagree that Migrants around Calais and Calais jungle should be merged. The former should be about the activities, routes and motivations of the migrants, whereas the latter is only concerned about what happens in the camp(s), what facilities there are and such. There is a distinction, since people migrating through Calais may not necessarily live in the Jungle, and not everyone in and around the Jungle is a migrant. Besides, there's enough information to fill the Calais Jungle article, and some of that isn't very relevant to the other two article, like the placement sanitary facilities in year X. Migrants around Calais and Calais migrant crisis (1999–present) seem like a good merge though. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 19:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Merging Calais migrant crisis and Migrants around Calais

It seems obvious to me that we should merge Calais migrant crisis and Migrants around Calais into a single article. Do others agree, and, if so, what should the resulting article be titled? I would prefer "Calais migrant crisis" as that is less ambiguous than "Migrants around Calais" and seems to match use in media coverage. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Agree - although the "crisis" in "Calais migrant crisis" sounds a little tabloid to me. It should be encyclopedicized (if such a word were to exist) to "...controversy", "...issues" or similar. But that's an issue of the talk page of that article. DeCausa (talk) 13:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Likewise agree, the "Migrants around Calais" are an ingredient in the crisis and I can see no point divorcing this article from the others.Cloptonson (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Background information on page views over the last 30 days

• Calais jungle 10819
• Migrants around Calais 6186
• Calais migrant crisis 843

Philafrenzy (talk) 12:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

It should be clarified that Calais migrant crisis has only existed since 21 August 2015‎ (i.e. not yet 30 days), although that doesn't change the fact that it is viewed much less than the other two articles. One of the reasons for this is the that the other two are linked to much more from other articles, and from Template:European migrant crisis. I doubt that people are more likely to type "Migrants around Calais" into the search box. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes I was aware of that. Calais jungle is the oldest article and includes a much searched for term. I was surprised when Corriebertus created Migrants around Calais as I would have thought he would have expanded Calais jungle but his article is a good article. I would suggest that Calais jungle be retained with a narrow focus on the "jungle" and conditions in the camps and Calais migrant crisis be merged into Migrants around Calais for a wider discussion of the topic. The resulting article could be considered for a rename, possibly to Calais migrant crisis which seems more searchable. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree. 'Calais jungle' has been a location of interest for several years (since 2002 according to the article) but the Calais Migrant Crisis is an ongoing event.These two articles should not merged. I'm also discussing with several people off Wikipedia and we are going to invest some effort in improving th quality of the 'Calais jungle' article. If any experienced wikipedians would like to help please let me know. Pranay Da Spyder (talk) 23:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I will help. -Lopifalko (talk)

Comment on merge proposals

Having just come across these articles, my initial reaction was that all three could be merged into one. But User:Pranman above makes the point that there's at least two separate topics here, one on the longstanding issue of migrant/refugee camps around Calais, and one on the developments in 2015 that saw the numbers there increasing considerably. Based on that approach, I'd suggest Calais jungle could be merged with Migrants around Calais to be a single article about the history of migrant camps in the area, while Calais migrant crisis could be kept as an article solely about recent events and the current situation. Robofish (talk) 16:16, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

"Calais Jungle" is a phrase that has entered the public consciousness and is by far the highest trafficked of the three so we need to retain an article of that name for the benefit of our readers I think. They want to know "what is the Calais Jungle?" "Is it an actual jungle?" etc. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Moving forward

It has been ten months since a possible merger was first mentioned. What is the consensus? It would be good to get this issue resolved. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:04, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I've read through the posts here and it seems that there's consensus on merge Calais migrant crisis and Migrants around Calais. I Support merge of Calais migrant crisis and Migrants around Calais but agree that the name "crisis" seems a bit tabloid so I second DeCausa's suggestion of renaming the merged article to something like "migrants in Calais" or something similar. I think the Calais Jungle article is getting better and is clearly about a specific location so I don't think it should be part of this merge.Monopoly31121993 (talk) 15:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

And its been over 2 months since this comment. I will now proceed with the merge, which I also support, and get it finally done. As Monopoly31121993 has said, I will merge Calais migrant crisis into Migrants around Calais. --Hyperwq+639 (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Migrants around Calais. 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/20091227054303/http://www.lexpress.fr/actualites/2/des-afghans-devraient-etre-expulses-mardi-selon-la-cimade_835632.html to http://www.lexpress.fr/actualites/2/des-afghans-devraient-etre-expulses-mardi-selon-la-cimade_835632.html

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) 03:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Calais blockade be merged into Migrants around Calais, because of the modest new information in 'Blockade,' and the existing subsection in 'Migrants.' The text itself overlaps. The 'Migrants' article is of a reasonable size that the merge will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. PLawrence99cx (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

• Support - consolidating the various articles on this topic is much needed, and Calais blockade is an obvious candidate for merging. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
• Support this is simply historical and barely needs a paragraph. Pincrete (talk) 22:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:59, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Migrants around Calais. 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/20150923210243/http://www.connexionfrance.com/news_articles.php?id=1076 to http://www.connexionfrance.com/news_articles.php?id=1076

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) 23:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Restructuring article (March 2020)

I'm going to attempt a restructure of this article to attempt to remove duplication, to bring the focus more directly onto the subject, and to give cohesion to the various sections currently in the article (mostly by bringing a group of them under a "History" heading). --Woofboy (talk) 18:17, 7 March 2020 (UTC)