This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Archaeology Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Anthropology Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Human Genetic History (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human Genetic History, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human Genetic HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryHuman Genetic History History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Ethnic groups High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Economics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'm inclined to think that this one is beyond redemption. That old 19th Century view is just too pervasive and too full of errors. Wipe it, delete and start again is probably the wisest thing. Tannin 11:06, 6 April 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The whole concept is simply completely dated in parts and would merit a in-depth discussion. --Yak 15:00, 6 April 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem of this article as i see it is that it is basicaly historical information, and has nothing on mordern migration. What i think it needs is:

• Definition
• Causes of migration

Volintory migrtation Forced migration - War, Natural disarsters, ect.

• • "Push Factors"
  • "Pull Factors"
• Diffrent types of migration
  • Daily
  • Serasional
  • Perlimenrt
  • Local
  • Reginal
    • Rural to Urban
  • International

(not a compleat list of issues to be addressed, and not that wel orderd ATM)

then a bit about historical migrations. tooto 14:18, 6 August 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this needs a redesign. I think the main problem is that the article mixes up a whole bunch of different things:

1. Large numbers of people moving to a new location and settling there (that's what I would call migration), example: 17th-20th century Europeans migrating to America.
2. Language spread. Linguists are now pretty clear that language spread does not require a migration in sense 1. Nobody knows if any Proto-Indo-Europeans ever migrated anywhere; it's very well possible that their language "migrated" (was adopted by their neighbors and thus spread) without any humans ever moving very far.
3. Military conquest. That's what many of the "Great Migrations" around AD 500 probably were, according to many modern historians. I.e., the actual number of people moving was rather small, they just were quite belligerent and good at plundering. ;) Otherwise it gets difficult to explain how many of these nations so quickly disappeared after their military fortune changed.

Chl 23:43, 11 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Migrations around 500, perhaps, but not all of those up to 650s or 900s... --Joy [shallot] 17:59, 12 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the objections others have cited about this article. But is this article even necessary. There are already separate articles (also in need of major revision, but not nearly as bad) on early human migration and historic human migration. This article might be better as a disambiguation stub linking to the other two articles, as well as to related issues like nomads, immigration, etc. It's frightening just how long ago the complaints about this page have been here without any resolution. Ftjrwrites (talk) 17:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that some paragraphs were repeated in the article. Is this standard in Wikipedia for articles derived from the Britannia Encyclopedia of 1911, or was this a mistake? Rickyrab 18:01, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Um, you introduced them yourself, see the page history. It's possible that two concurrent submits (too many clicks?) caused the server to duplicate them. I'm cleaning it up now... --Joy [shallot] 19:50, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

One of them is the contention that "other migrations generally didn't give rise to new states" - it treats cenutries of history of Moorish Spain as a mere annoyance in the politics of Christian Europe.

Another is the short paragraph that deals with the Great migration that brought down the Roman Empire and produced the Europe we know today. Great migration is a dissambig which sends users to this paragraph, and the only link one can provide is Völkerwanderung, but that's not much of an article either. I think we should move Great migration to Great migration (dissambiguation) and write an extensive article at Great migration. That would be a slightly euro-centric usage, but it was one of the largest migrations ever and even the dissambig suggests that this is the primary meaning of the expression. Zocky 17:29, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oh? Human migration is a general phenomenon. The Migration period, that I guess covers the same as the Great migration, was a specific phenomenon that well merits its own article. It seems to me, given that I now really do understand your intentions, that what would be best to do, is to move Völkerwanderung to either Great migration or Migration period, and then, of course, to redirect from the other, and, of course, improve the article. --Ruhrjung 18:07, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

...the Polynesians, starting with the Lapita culture, have proven to be the most successful in the art of navigation, as the Norse adventurers in the North Atlantic and the Arab traders in the Indian Ocean did not create permanent settlements.

I hope no one is forgetting Iceland (Norse), Zanzibar (Arab), Dar es Salaam (Arab) and other permanent settlements, not to mention the spread of Islam across the Indian Ocean rim! Who was most successful in navigating is kind of subjective anyway, hence my edit. --147.109.250.24 01:38, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I would also question equating skilled navigation with creating settlements; the link seems tenuous. I would suggest removing the 'claim' the Polynesians (who were certainly great navigators) have been proven to be the most successful navigators. --SteveP 07:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

is it just british english that has out-migration including migration within one's country of origin (from rural Maine to the NYC, say)? doesn t american english make the same distinction? appealing for views on this. thanx -mayumashu — Preceding undated comment added 19:22, 4 March 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In educated British English, as in American English at similar cultural levels, we have the word "emigration" in which the "e-" is a variant of "ex-" meaning "out". The converse is "immigration". What, one wonders, is the kind of migration that is not "out"-migration. See tautology. --Wetman 21:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Every migration is out of a certain locality. However, this is depending on the context of the locality. When discussing emigration of people from rural into urban areas of one country you are simply focusing on migration. If you are discussing just people leaving rural areas and the reasons for it, you might want to emphasize the emigration. Or in another example, if you want to compare immigration and emigration numbers for a particular place, then the immigration for that place is not emigration for that same place.Viewviewer 20:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I agree with other that this page has errors. One in particular - that human migration necessarily refers to the movement en masse, as opposed to individual migration. I think this particular definition may be for one area of study/practice, but not for all - Guppy 16:40, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The first line of the article reads "Human migration denotes any movement of groups of people from one locality to another." --Wetman 21:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

this was picked out from the reference desk. Anyone would like to add that to the article?

this

with this

equals:

While I was doing a map for the migrations of the human race I decided to cross it with some information from the ice age article. And for my surprise the result is that the human migrations were mainly during the colder periods of the ice age. The Bering Strait crossing coincided with a real cold period. Why is that? Is the data wrong, or is there a conclusion to be taken that i didn´t understand?--Alexandre Van de Sande 18:53, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When the earth is colder more water is locked up as solid ice, so there is less in the sea and ocean. The lower sea level joins place that are now separated by open water. People walked the Bering Staight (or perhaps the Aleutians) because there was land there. Similarly the english channel was dry enough to walk (even farm, probably), but the rising sea levels swamped this. Places on either side (notably Norfolk and the Netherlands) are barely above water now. Also some places (e.g. the mainland of Britain) were partially covered with ice. The weight of the icesheet bearing down on Scotland lifted southern England up (like a seesaw). Now that the ice sheet is gone England is sinking and Scotland rising (this is post-glacial rebound). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:01, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

I suppose as to why the coldest part of the ice age (I'm guessing here): given a couple of particularly bad winters might make a nomadic tribe move further than normal, hoping to find greener pastures (and conversely, if the weather's not too bad, there's no point in moving from your cushy home). And humans (partularly humans with basic technology like fur clothing and flint tools) are generalists, able to take advantage of environmental changes, which may drive away dangerous or competing specialists like wolves. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:16, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

excellent map! since you ask about the letters, they are markers for individual mutations, i.e. you can trace the migrations by watching how the letters move along the arrows. for example, the B mutation occurs apparently in East Asia and travels across the Pacific and North America to South America. I think the letters are used universally, i.e. the "A" "B" "C" alleles etc. are technical terms agreed upon by geneticists, so I decided to include them in Image:Human mtDNA migration.png.

As for the temperature, I doubt there is a direct causation, at least for the first 'gap': people were still in Africa, and I don't see how a warm period would have kept them from emigrating. It just so happens that they didn't emigrate for another 60ka or so. Further phyla that were formed within Africa between 130k BP and 70k BP are probably just not shown in the diagram because they don't correspond to large movements. dab (ᛏ) 19:45, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out that it was something like that. But without a further explanation the letters are only usefull to help you guide in a otherwise confusing map of lines. I believe the new map is better organized so this won´t be necessary - on the contrary they only add noise to the map (i tested). If we can figure out which lineage each letter refers to, so as to help someone inters]ested gather more information about each lineage (Aborigine, Asiatic, Indo-european etc) then the letters would be interesting. My theory is never add anything that cannot be univerally understood, suposing that some geneticist will understand... By the way if someone would be nice enough to manage a high resolution dymaxion map we could have a yet higher resolution version of this guy...--Alexandre Van de Sande 20:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh they are called Haplogroups. I just found out in this great online encyclopedia I know. There is something about that in Supercluster (genetic). Can somebody link the letter in File:Human mtDNA migration.png to the actual names?--Alexandre Van de Sande 21:06, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the map looks better without the letters. It's just that if the human migration article is to discuss these haplogroups, it would be useful to have them in there, and I do hope that at some point the article will give that amount of detail. dab (ᛏ) 08:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This info is great! Can it end up in an article, instead of archives from here? AlMac 07:28, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Human migration involves a bit more than European migration (the author rather naively assumes that language migration presupposes population migration)...this section needs serious work and hasn't taken the conscientious advice of earlier critiques. Remove this article, less the blind lead the more blind. 13 Nov 2005 user: Kemet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kemet (talk • contribs) 05:52, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kya? I finally figured out that Kya was one thousand years ago, but it would help if there was a notation for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haverberg (talk • contribs) 03:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would colder winters help to preserve folks and make it more likely for archeologists to find remains? Decomposition occurs more rapidly in warm, wet climates and might mean there is less for archeologists to find from the warm periods. sn‾uǝɹɹɐʍɯ (talk) 00:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently noticed Single-origin hypothesis and Multiregional hypothesis. If the latter is taken seriously, it should be mentioned in the section on the earliest migrations. -- Beland 13:41, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For more then 3 months no one did anything about that. Also, modern genetics tells us that multiregional hypothesis is not so relevant anymore. So, I removed sectPOV. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 01:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

665 496 103 46.112.76.153 (talk) 07:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see the Chunyun article.--Skyfiler 01:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal migration, called Transhumance is certainly noteworthy. A brief account with a Main article: Transhumance heading would be the way. --Wetman 12:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs more things from the asian and african sides of thing... Quid of the Bantou migrations, or the many peoples from the central asia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.113.240 (talk) 05:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I re-wrote the early modern section. This page also badly needs a section on 19th and 20th c migrations. It also needs much more on non-European migration. Jdorney 12:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody have any information about the Austronesian expansion? It should be in this article for many reasons:

A) They colonized of the Maritime Southeast Asia, largely displacing the indigenous inhabitants(the Australoid peoples) of that region. They were also settling lands over relatively longer distances before the more notable Europeans did.

B) Their descendants, the Polynesians settled most of the western Pacific Islands.

C) Their range was between Madagascar and Hawaii(if you count the Polynesians), a span that transverse almost half of the planet.

D) The Austronesian language family is a candidate for being the largest, if not one of the largest, language family in the history of mankind.

E) They number at least 300 Million, as opposed to the Bantus which number significantly less.

I see an entry for Polynesians but not for Austronesians as a whole. I know research and info about the topic is limited and it's the primary reason I am taking this to the talk pages instead. Any input would be appreciated.--Chicbicyclist 10:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Migration in the European Union, Short distance migration - these two paragrapsh are in desperate need of improvment, both factual and language. Nim 13:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Nimrod88[reply]

A map for the last few millennia or centuries would be helpful. -- Beland 04:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on those subjects are chaotically and confusingly named. Please see a proposal to standardize all names here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite important migrations missing in the map, specially from the cultural point of view:

The Spanish migration into Latin America.

The African migration into North America & Brazil.

Because this is due to the recentness of such events. --Dagofloreswi (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Laotian migration into the United States, Canada, and French caused by government corruption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.99.150 (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is the second picture on the right-hand side supposed to have the description:

"mitochondrial DNA-based chart of large human migrations. (Numbers are millennia before present)"

Seems like someone has had some fun with this article...

Ay Dee (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of it ? That article scope is too broad . Why not types of migration instead of the chronological approach . Under section-title 'Theory', causes of migration are listed, and it seems a bit fledgling, without knowing what migration is . It seems there is no tag at WP:TC that fits . Sechinsic (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is new text. I agree with your suggestion - the topic "Human Migration" is extremely broad. Maybe this page should be split into two or more different pages? TasneemIslam1025 (talk) 02:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My colleague and I would like to propose the addition of a section entitled "Migration for Work in the 20th and 21st Century." We propose this in order to include in this page a section that reflects a more modern migration which we believe will provide a contemporary example of migration in order to update this page. FaithSara (talk) 02:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC), DArquero (talk) 02:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Migrants’ New Paths Reshaping Latin America DAMIEN CAVE published NYT January 5, 2012. See Immigration#Economic migrant 99.190.80.182 (talk) 06:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an animated video about international migration. It might be interesting for this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOZmqIwqur4 85.179.155.104 (talk) 08:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section that started with "The diversification of Asian migration flows" (which I made into a sub-heading as it appeared that was the intent of the original contributor of that section) references a table and a chart which are not included here in the article. Can those be recovered, or should the references be removed? 1bandsaw (talk) 00:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have been researching Homo Sapien Dispersal Patterns. One problem that continuously arises is the concept that Homo Sapien seems to appear in China before in Israel. Is it possible that Homo Sapien evolved in two separate places: Africa and Eastern Asia? Maybe it is possible that Homo Sapien evolved in 2 places rather than once? Just a little Theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talwerts (talk • contribs) 04:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That idea is called the multiregional theory, and it is not considered plausible or supported by current evidence.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 04:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Manus, thanks for this response! talwerts is a student at UIUC and is working on an assignment. Thanks for engaging. Vaparedes (talk) 21:09, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The scope of International migration and Human migration overlaps, and so it seems reasonable to merge them. This was proposed in 2014, and completed with a redirect in 2015. This was reversed by User:Andy Dingley this month, but the intention seems to be that a merge is still worthwhile. Therefore, I'm reproposing, tagging both pages. Klbrain (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Human migration" should be the main topic, not just 21st-century statistics. The material in this article should be split, among International migration (immigration, emigration) vs. Internal migration, and history of human migration#Contemporary_history. --dab (𒁳) 10:52, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing, given no support for either the split of the merge and discussion stale. Klbrain (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 November 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Warrenfan18. Peer reviewers: Bsward, Williamjiang0816.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Population mouvement in Cameroon duering the 19 century Population mouvement or migration refers to the mouvement or displacement of people from one are to another due voluntary or involuntary mouvement.the main direction was from the North to South . The causes of the mouvement is explain in term of political,économic and social reason. A) political reson - payement of trebuties - inter tribal war of Modibo Adama - succession desputed B) economic reason - search for fertile soil - search for grazing Land C) social reason - the role of water bodies - the role of hills and escapment - social ties or religous conflit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:2880:FF:14:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this text block is useful here? It was recently added at developing country by a novice editor but didn't fit there. Also it seems a bit essay-like, pushing a point of view but perhaps some of it can be used for this article?:

Only one in thirty global citizens have ever migrated,^[1] while only about 2 percent of the 281 million immigrants across borders are from developing countries.^[2] The benefit of migration for developing countries is exponential. As a result of internal migration from unproductive rural areas to urban areas, there is a reallocation of labor that aids productivity, output, and economic development.^[3] As economic growth occurs, income and standard of living also grows. If residents are able to immigrate across countries, the citizens themselves can match their skills more effectively to a respective economy, bettering their own livelihood. Immigrants are able to raise their per capita income by over 30 percent.^[4]

Unfortunately, there are many factors that are specific to developing countries that prevent migration. Misinformation and lack of accessibility in rural conditions leave citizens misled and unaware of the opportunities that they have. Additionally, there are liquidity constraints because of the high levels of poverty that make migrating impossible due to the high costs of moving. As well, there are explicit policy barriers that directly limit migration due to explicit quotas from certain countries.^[3] Lastly, the uncertainty, culture shock, and detachment from home associated with migrating are the main psychological factors that prevent citizens from migrating.^[5] EMsmile (talk) 14:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EMsmile (talk) 14:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 19 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mango37836 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: FlowerandFeast.

— Assignment last updated by Ctalwalker (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia Editors,

I am writing to suggest a revamping of the Human Migration Page. I have contacted my Wiki Assistant and he/she has advised me to submit my remarks here. Yesterday I created my account but have previosuly done some Wiki editing around 5 years ago. I use the encyclopedia often but am retired and my usage is leisurely.

Regarding the Human Migration page: While there's a lot of good information, there is need for a major revamping. There are contradictions between the sections, the logic is weak, and there's a jumble of conflicting definitions, etc. The result is confusion. These issues have been raised before. For example, back in 2015/17 someone suggested a "Merge". I suggest a reshuffle and cutting. The topic needs to be precisely defined, logical connection between sections made, and then the links to other Wiki pages clearly specified. The way it stands now, this page tries to do everything and ends up doing nothing.

This is an important topic. Please have a look at it. I could help revise but it would mean a total reshuffle. Thanks for you consideration on this.

Jansan72 (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"have previosuly done some Wiki editing around 5 years ago" Under which name? Dimadick (talk) 14:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dimadick,

It was too long ago. I don't remember my name from those days. Jansan72 (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Human migration → Migration
• Migration → Migration (disambiguation)

– The entire article uses the term migration instead of human migration, except the first paragraph. This article is the primary topic of Migration, as confirmed by the hatnotes and the sources actually used by the article. Using the title Human migration fails WP:ASTONISH since readers expect to read about pre-historic migration patterns from such title. Kenneth Kho (talk) 07:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose –

• The entire article uses the term migration instead of human migration, except the first paragraph – yes, that is how it generally works with disambiguated titles.
• This article is the primary topic of Migration, as confirmed by the hatnotes – certainly not. Bird migration easily disqualifies this by itself (it gets more monthly page views!), and it's not the only other high-traffic listing. The hatnotes mean literally nothing, as they are meant to aid the reader who has already managed to get to the "Human migration" article.
• Using the title Human migration fails WP:ASTONISH – that's potentially a problem with the article title, not evidence that this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.

Remsense ‥ 论 07:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Human migration is the highest placed on the disambiguation list, and the second result that came up when googling for "migration wikipedia" after Migration (2023 film), arguably the movie only won because its wikipedia title being precisely "Migration" provides higher ranking, and bird migration yielding higher traffic might also have to do with the number of people that found difficulty locating the wikipedia article of the colloquial migration. Kenneth Kho (talk) 12:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not clear to me how these points support your argument. The question is whether Migration = Human migration for readers, and as illustrated above, other topics obviously seem to compete for that mindspace more than enough such that human migration doesn't represent the vast majority as required by WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If I can try to self-analyse, I really don't think human migration always pops to mind first for me—again, I think of birds. Remsense ‥ 论 12:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kenneth Kho, given you added reasoning after I replied (generally please don't edit your comments like that)—many things could be the case, but frankly it seems a bit absurd that this would be a meaningful factor that would impact the core logic here. If you would, pause and consider for a moment whether it is plausible for bird migration to pop to someone's mind when they think of merely "migration". If this is plausible, then it's already pretty unlikely that there's a PRIMARYTOPIC here. Remsense ‥ 论 14:59, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is plausible that someone thinks of the birds when they hear of the word "migration", but it is not plausible that someone thinks migration means "bird migration", while it is very much common for people to think that migration means migrating to another state or country. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is extremely plausible that someone is looking for bird migration when they type "migration" into the search bar. Remsense ‥ 论 15:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine the bird expert who is looking for bird migration when they type "migration" would be astonished if they see bird migration being titled migration, and not astonished if they see human migration being titled migration. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief—no one would be expecting to get Bird migration, but they very plausibly could be expecting a disambiguation page from which they could get there. Remsense ‥ 论 15:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody likes a disambiguation page, the bird expert would want to click on bird migration instead of migration (disambiguation), and the lay readers would want to click on migration, instead of migration (disambiguation) to then click human migration. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• oppose no reason to believe that human migration is the wp:primarytopic. Further, it would be wp:astonishing to readers given the prominence of bird migration [1]—blindlynx 14:29, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There are times when bird migration has more traffic, there are times when human migration has more traffic, but the point is that even if bird migration has 10X the traffic of human migration, there is no way that migration means bird migration, while it is very much common in conversations to say that migration means human migration. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The relative prevalence of the topics, both often referred to merely as "migration" in many instances, does matter when the burden we are trying to clear is a primary topic being the intended referent in an overwhelming majority of cases. Remsense ‥ 论 15:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The sources in Bird migration use the term bird migration, and not migration. The sources in Human migration mostly use the term migration, and not human migration. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but in casual conversation and in running text throughout the article, merely "migration" is often uses, and suffices to specify the topic. It is very clear what I am saying here, and it feels like you are trying to dance around a very clear argument at this point. Remsense ‥ 论 15:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:AT is based on what the sources say, the sources say bird migration is bird migration, and human migration is migration, the titles should follow it. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That is a good point, thank you. I'm now typing merely "migration" etc. into academic databases to try to get a sense of which terms are used when. Remsense ‥ 论 15:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I searched wiki library for 'migration' of the 50 most relevant hit 9 are about human migration and the renaming 41 are about animal migration of which 19 are about birds. [2]

  I'm sorry but i simply I do not see any evidence that 'migration' means 'human migration', if you have any please show it to us—blindlynx 17:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  On the other hand, my Google Books results are skewed roughly the other way. I do still think the threshold isn't met, but it seems more reasonable to consider than before. Remsense ‥ 论 17:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  True. Agreed nothing points to one being a clear meaning of the unqualified term—blindlynx 18:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  True, the top results are mostly book titles without disambiguated migration, talking about human migrations. Kenneth Kho (talk) 21:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To analyze Google Books, we can use their Ngrams tool, so for example we can check which words appear before and after mentions of the word 'migration' in books like this. This doesn't mention either humans or birds as such. We can check what comes together with the top-most prefix and suffix "of" like this, and here we start seeing both people and birds mentioned. If we try to read into the "the" forms like this, there's more mentions of people and birds. I don't think this is conclusive at all, either way. --Joy (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The wiki library leans towards hard science, searching 'human migration' also mostly yields prehistoric migration outside the scope of this article. I figured the best way to get results on contemporary migration there is to relate it to climate change which is hard science. Searching for 'climate change migration' yields results such as "Mapping the Future of Migration and Climate Change Science", "Climate Change and Migration: A Dynamic Model" "How Should We Talk About Climate Change and Migration?". Climate experts tend to think of humans when they think of migration, even though birds are also affected, in which case they need to clarify that it is about birds. Kenneth Kho (talk) 21:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If you look at the titles in either search on wiki library there are plenty of hits for human migration where it is qualified with 'human' and for animal migration is just 'migration'. i am not seeing how 'human migration' meets WP:PT1 for just 'migration'—blindlynx 21:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The ones about animals contain the name of the animal in the title as far as I can see, it does not necessarily say bird migration, but it says something like "factors such and such affect migration of insert some bird names". Kenneth Kho (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:DPT, we can have a look at some stats. WikiNav for Migration for November shows readers chose the top option the most, but not nearly as commonly as would typically be expected from a primary topic - of the 1.2k people who saw the list (1193 in pageviews), we could only identify 227 clicks to the top option (~19%), while 146 were filtered (~12%), while we know 409 went elsewhere (~34%). The second most common option was actually a recent cartoon about bird migrations listed near the bottom. If the proposed primary topic doesn't compare well to everything else, and doesn't even compare particularly well to something relatively trivial like that, it doesn't seem like we have a problem with navigation that this change would resolve, rather it seems like we'd just risk creating new problems. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  (Oh, thank you for cluing me in to that tool.) Remsense ‥ 论 22:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Good to hear :) Do note that its output is not always as clear as this, a recent example where I had to go into a lot of more nuance is at Talk:Pavlova (dessert). --Joy (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There are only 636 outgoing traffic, the bottom most table is exhaustive. The movie should be excluded due to recentism, so that leaves us with human-related migration being 227+72+13=312 (66%) and animal-related migration being 68+55+37=160 (34%), sufficient to establish a primary topic. Kenneth Kho (talk) 22:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The film came out last year, so I feel totally excluding it for its bias is a bit misleading. I wish we had this data over a slightly longer timeframe. Remsense ‥ 论 22:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's possible to look up historical data in the meta:Research:Wikipedia clickstream archive. For example:

  clickstream-enwiki-2017-11.tsv:

  • Migration Human_migration link 617
  • Migration Animal_migration link 233
  • Migration Bird_migration link 150
  • Migration Immigration link 129
  • Migration Hyphen-minus other 53
  • Migration Migrant link 52
  • Migration Emigration link 48
  • Migration Rearrangement_reaction link 37
  • Migration Fish_migration link 37
  • Migration Data_migration link 37
  • Migration Reverse_migration_(birds) link 30
  • Migration Molecular_diffusion link 23
  • Migration Insect_migration link 21
  • Migration Software_modernization link 18
  • Migration Main_Page other 18
  • Migration System_migration link 16
  • Migration Migration_(Bonobo_album) link 13
  • Migration Population_genetics link 11
  • Migration Cell_migration link 11
  • Migration Schema_migration link 10
  • Migration Forest_migration link 10
  • total: 1574 to 21 identified destinations

  clickstream-enwiki-2020-11.tsv:

  • Migration Human_migration link 338
  • Migration Migration_(ecology) link 148
  • Migration International_migration link 91
  • Migration Hyphen-minus other 32
  • Migration Schema_migration link 22
  • Migration Immigration link 22
  • Migration Rearrangement_reaction link 21
  • Migration Migrant link 17
  • Migration Cell_migration link 12
  • Migration Data_migration link 11
  • Migration Molecular_diffusion link 10
  • Migration Migration_(virtualization) link 10
  • total: 734 to 12 identified destinations

  clickstream-enwiki-2022-05.tsv:

  • Migration Human_migration link 275
  • Migration International_migration link 84
  • Migration Migration_(ecology) link 70
  • Migration Bird_migration link 56
  • Migration Animal_migration link 49
  • Migration Immigration link 23
  • Migration Emigration link 14
  • Migration Rearrangement_reaction link 11
  • total: 582 to 8 identified destinations

  So the human migration article seems to consistently get less than half of identifiable clickstreams, let alone any long tail of filtered clickstreams (which should tilt more towards the less popular topics). --Joy (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It is easily two third of the outgoing traffic if you lump in the numbers for international migration (which the dab deems a sub article of human migration) and immigration, these are the same demographics that the human migration article is trying to cater. Kenneth Kho (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Once again, it's not easily two thirds of the outgoing traffic because the filtered (anonymized) clickstreams are not part of these numbers, and as I explained below, lumping these together does not implicitly make navigation better. --Joy (talk) 22:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No, you're failing to include the filtered (anonymized) category in the calculation. Obviously part of this is because WikiNav was never fixed to make this more obvious, but still.

  Likewise, you can't just add this up mechanically and proclaim that the human migration article is necessarily a good way to continue to lead reader traffic to the other two related topics (international and immigration), because those are clearly different topics that may attract different readers. The existing unwieldy hatnote on top of the human migration article already illustrates that to an extent. --Joy (talk) 22:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not sure how anonymized category can be used to conclude anything, and if there is a case to be made to explain why half of the ingoing traffic clicked away, it is because they are looking for the article on contemporary migration, and the current human migration title does not sound like it. Kenneth Kho (talk) 22:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, it can't be used to conclude much, other than to make it more obvious that there's uncertainty here. Or ambiguity, hint, hint :)

  If you primarily want to rename the human migration article, that's a completely valid discussion, but apparently it should be a separate one. --Joy (talk) 22:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose my sense is pretty strong that none of the articles we have that could be referred to as "migration" are sufficiently primary under either WP:PT1 or WP:PT2 to be at the base name. And like, my sense is that I read more works that add "human" when talking about human migration than when talking about animal migration. A quick scan over articles indexed by ebscohost show that "bare" migration is most likely to refer to some form of animal migration (birds and fish, most commonly it seems) and human migration is referred to by both "human migration" and "migration". A few examples on the first page of results. It'd be nice, however, if the Wikipedia search autocomplete could figure out to prioritize showing Migration (human) when search for just "migration"... Hm, there's no Migration human redirect, I wonder if creating that would help...
  • "Exploring the potential of dental calculus to shed light on past human migrations in Oceania."
  • "Using micro-CT to explore bone density variations in the skulls of the vulnerable Opsariichthys uncirostris uncirostris (Three-lips fish) during reproductive migration to a Lake Biwa tributary."
  • "Wild salmon migration routes influence sea lice infestations: An agent-based model predicting farm-related infestations on juvenile salmon."
  • "Rare and highly destructive wildfires drive human migration in the U.S."
  • "Understanding the global subnational migration patterns driven by hydrological intrusion exposure"
  • "Macro-scale relationship between body mass and timing of bird migration". Skynxnex (talk) 22:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. The status quo is correct because there is no strong evidence of a clear primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]