Talk:Human trafficking/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

NPOV in Sex Trafficking

Some paragraphs were written with an emotionally-loaded tone. I don't dispute the accuracy of the statements, but it's not encyclopeadic in tone. Removed on large passage immediately, marked two others [citation needed], and one as biased. This needs a major edit beyond my expertise. --Thomasdelbert (talk) 03:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I didn't do any editing, but this paragraph in particular stood out:

"Female tourists can be targeted as they are far from home and not likely to be missed quickly. A female tourist is vulnerable as she is moving around and no one back home is tracking her hourly movements. She can go missing for quite some time and no one will know. She can be snatched off the street and sold within an hour and no one even knows what brothel bought her. She is not in contact with locals so they do not report her missing. Locals cops do not know she is gone or to go looking for her. Tourists are very vulnerable."

It reads like someone just saw "Taken" & wanted to make absolutely sure everyone got the point. There is already a brief mention of tourists as an at-risk group, & I don't see any evidence female tourists are targeted more aggressively than other at-risk groups. This passage makes it sound like tourists are the primary target of sex traffickers. It also sends the non-NPOV message that it's impossible for women to travel safely. I didn't edit, as the page appears to be locked, but I offer this as a paragraph to cut.Ctnelsen (talk) 01:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)ctnelsen

Inconsistencies/wrong data in map and other bias issues

  • The map in section "Human trafficking and sexual exploitation", sourced on Woman Stats Project, has wrong data with regard to, at least, most LatinAmerican countries. Those countries are shown under the tag "trafficking is limitedly illegal...", which in a number of cases is inconsistent with other data sources quoted elsewhere in the article (the U.S. Dept. of State "Trafficking in Persons" reports, and the "3P Anti-trafficking Policy Index"). By the way of example: the laws of Argentina regarding human trafficking (cfr. [Law 26364, enacted April 29, 2008]) are fully consistent with the Palermo Protocol and forbid and punish every form of trafficking. The map's data is even inconsistent with the Woman Stats Project methodological criteria. Map should be removed from the article, or a strong caveat emptor on map's bias should be included in the caption.
  • The section "Global Extent" should include an introductory paragraph stating that the data shown reflect the opinion of the U.S. Department of State, and are not based on any scientific, peer-reviewed, study whatsoever.
  • In addition, I agree with Ctnelsen's comments above.

If there is no objection within a reasonable time frame, I will apply the required changes. Thanks! Cinabrium (talk) 22:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Popular culture

I Think that this is popular in countries around the United States because most of the countries don't have law enforcement and could get away with this act. But regardless there are also many countries in Africa and Mideast that go through this same or more of this. But its not really important where it happens, but the fact that its happening and it need to be stop! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrivera6 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Someone please edit the section. The first entry about the film "The Whistle Blower" is completely non-encyclopedic in tone, and contains numerous grammatical mistakes.96.55.171.48 (talk) 02:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Non-govermental efforts

Right now, the article focuses on government and legal actions dealing with human trafficking. We do have small section on Campaigns, which mentions a few of the non-government campaigns to battle trafficking, but it is very short and misses some major players. I think it would be informative for the reader to know some of the ways that companies, organizations, and private individuals are addressing trafficking. For example, we could talk about efforts to raise public awareness, support victims, limit the ability of traffickers to transport and harbor victims, change laws, and discourage clients. I think would improve the quality of the article. Peculiar Light (talk) 05:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

evolved definition and migration

The definition of trafficking appears to have evolved between the 1990s and the 2000s. <ref>Rao, Smriti, & Christina Presenti, ''Understanding Human Trafficking Origin: A Cross-Country Empirical Analysis'', in ''Feminist Economics'', vol. 18, no. 2 (April, 2012), pp. 231–263, esp. pp. 233–234 (in [§] ''The Literature on Trafficking'') (author Rao asst. prof. economics & global studies, Assumption Coll., Worcester, Mass., & author Presenti graduate Assumption Coll. (2009), per p. 320 (''Notes on Contributors'')).</ref> I don't know the subject well enough or have the time to study it to edit the article myself, so I leave this to other editors to consider. Thanks. Nick Levinson (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC) (Corrected a nowiki tag, thus making a referent appear as intended: 20:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC))

Contribution Proposal

I concur with users Peculiar Light and Nick Levinson. I plan on majorly reorganizing the contents of the human trafficking article so that everything flows logically and is placed in the right section. The Campaigns section is indeed very small, and it is my goal to at least start the way for including some major NGO anti trafficking campaigns that have significant clout, and explain the explored effects of the popular media's portrayal of the issue. Thank you to Nick Levinson for the suggestion of the article, I will be drawing from it to give a more holistic and chronological picture of human trafficking on a global scale. Other things that I would like to add to the article include more methodologies and varying statistics on human trafficking on a global scale, describing what traffickers and victims look like and do across the globe (as they do differ), discussing societal impacts of human trafficking (especially economically), possibly how notable countries outside of the U.S. and Europe deal with the issue, significantly expanding the section on controversies and criticism surrounding the issue (from feminist and other perspectives), adding to how religion and popular media participate in the discourse on the issue, and ultimately, structural factors such as globalization that drive and perpetuate human trafficking. Any suggestions on articles and other sources to incorporate are appreciated. I apologize in advance as I will not be able to do everything to perfect the article, but I hope more Wiki users will help improve this page.

Kayceeho (talk) 05:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Assertion re the origin of human trafficking moved here.

I moved the following content recently added to the article here. It seems to me that this lacks both geographic and temporal context; what timeframe and geographic location does this relate to? Is it of global import? Perhaps it would be better placed in the Human trafficking in the United States article (I'm guessing that from the cited source. That source is not readable online, so I have not read it).

Sex trafficking victims originally came from Eastern and Central Europe but also from Latin America and Southeast Asia.

— citing George, Shelly. "The Strong Arm Of The Law Is Weak: How The Trafficking Victims Protection Act Fails To Assist Effectively Victims Of The Sex Trade." Creighton Law Review 45.3 (2012): 563-580. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Mar. 2013.

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of entry

I agree with the previous posting that the recent revision of this article has significantly improved the content of the article and the its fluidity and organization. I think that potential points for further revision and expanding include the profile sections under the Sex trafficking subsection. Both the profile of the victims and the traffickers could be expanded to include other profiles of those affected by sex trafficking. I also think that the sections on the different ways sex trafficking is being combated can be expanded to include other regions in the world that are left out, namely in Asian and Middle Eastern counties. Other than that, I think this article does a great job at maintaining neutrality, including a variety of sources and following Wikipedia's citation guidelines. I also think the map makes a great contribution to the quality of the article and its argument. B.chachere (talk) 16:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions, I do intend on expanding the profile sections, they do look quite miserable right now. I will try to add more on how specific Asian and Middle Eastern countries are combating human trafficking. I can probably add something about the specific campaign in Argentina as well, as it was sparked by a woman whose daughter went missing mysteriously, and she believes her daughter has been trafficked. Kayceeho (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Article hacked?

Definition identifies human trafficking as the the trade in Pokemon trading cards. Earlier version correctly identified it as the trade in humans. 69.76.225.239 (talk) 23:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Global extent

There used to be a table listing countries around the world and their US state department rating, (1 is good 3 is very bad). http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Human_trafficking&oldid=546881293 This table was moved from here to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Trafficking_and_Violence_Protection_Act_of_2000 , where it was subsequently deleted altogether. I don't know if that table belongs in Human Trafficking, but it doesn't really belong in VTVPA since that's a US-only law while the table is about world-wide human trafficking prevention efforts. It looks like someone went to a fair amount of work putting that together, so I'm hoping someone can find it a home rather than simply leaving it deleted everywhere. It cited this page for the info: http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2011/ Mwenechanga (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

UK?

There is a dedicated page on Human Trafficking in the United States. Why isn't there an equivalent page for the UK? No wiki article on historic slavery should fail to link-thru to modern slavery, under its new name 'human trafficking'. 109.154.9.232 (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

There is: Human trafficking in the United Kingdom. Meclee (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Happens under our noses.

A common misconception people have is that human trafficking doesn't really happen in the U.S. but that couldn't be more false. In rare cases, it happens at the Super Bowl. Slaves are brought in by "pimps" for men at the Super Bowl willing to pay and since everyone is all hyped up and wild at the Super Bowl this all goes unnoticed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjohn017 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Human Trafficking

There is human trafficking that consists of men, women, and children. Then there is sex trafficking which mostly consists of women and children; very rarely men.

Sjohn017 (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Social norms

The section 'Social Norms' needs to be revised in that not all societies and religions view females as inferior.Shadowrunner340 (talk) 12:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Sex workers..

A paragraph starts off with "Sex worker activists and organizations distinguish between human trafficking and legitimate sex work..."

I have several problems with this. 1) How does one get to be a "sex worker?" Sure, women joke about this, but the variety of clients, their ages, and their requests would make most women flinch. My answer is that they are targeted as people of low self-esteem, poor family support. They are kidnapped and raped into becoming a "sex worker." 2) Baring that, they are seduced into it through drugs and/or alcohol addiction. 3) When a group of teen-aged girls are asked what they would like to do in adult life, prostitution has to be rather low on the list, unless they are doing this already.

I think this is an example of several fallacies, particularly faulty generalization. To call someone a "sex worker" who was forced into that "work" by addiction, kidnapping or rape, seems to beg the real issue which is involuntary slavery, not "work." Student7 (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, yes, it tells: In fact, sex workers are natural allies in the fight against trafficking. Removed. My very best wishes (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Article organization re sex trafficking

I don't look at this article often, but I noticed two things about it today

  1. Combating Sex trafficking is a major-headed section rather than a subsection under the major-headed subsection on Sex trafficking.
  2. The Combating Sex trafficking section seems to contain material which speaks to the subtopic of combating human trafficking in general intermixed with material which speaks specifically to the the topic of Combating Sex trafficking.

Because of #2 above, it does not seem appropriate to recast the Combating Sex trafficking section as a subsection of the Sex trafficking section. However, it does seem to me that some reorganization of material might be in order. I haven't tried to work through the details, but I thought that it might be useful to mention this here for consideration by regular editors of this article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I tried to move the material based on content. Whew!
The good news is that it appears that a lot of the hard information is there.
The bad news is it still needs reorganization at the highest level.
The basic problem is that a number of nations "turn a blind eye" depending on their culture, to prostitution, per se. Okay for adults. Definitely discouraged for children. Because of the double standard, the Europeans (most notably) are vague about "human trafficking" whether it involves domestic servant slavery or just what exactly. U.S. a bit more clear since prostitution is illegal in most states, and "sex workers" looked upon as victims, rather than beneficiaries. Student7 (talk) 19:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's efforts to combat human trafficking

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) places a high priority on combating human trafficking. As such, we would request that the editors of this page consider the below text as an entry/addition to Section 4.3.2. I've included suggested footnotes/reference links in brackets.


== U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's efforts to combat human trafficking ==

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is the largest investigative agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the second largest in the U.S. government. ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) is responsible for enforcing more than 400 laws and has made combatting human trafficking1 one of its highest priorities. HSI utilizes a victim-centered approach23 to combating human trafficking, which places equal value on the identification and stabilization of victims, as well as the investigation and prosecution of traffickers.4

HSI’s strategy of outreach, coordination and coalition building was developed to combat human trafficking. HSI conducts outreach and training5 to educate federal, state, local and foreign law enforcement agencies, community groups, private industry and non-governmental organization (NGO) on HSI’s strategy. HSI develops and builds on existing partnerships with foreign governments6, law enforcement7, private industry and NGOs to form long term strategic relationships that foster information exchange and collaboration to combat human trafficking in the United States and around the world.


1http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/1581fin.php 2http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1104/110427washingtondc2.htm 3http://www.dhs.gov/blue-campaign/victim-centered-approach 4http://www.ice.gov/human-trafficking/# 5http://www.dhs.gov/awareness-training 6http://www.ice.gov/about/offices/homeland-security-investigations/oia/ 7https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1303/130312tulsa.htm

--geddy76 15:32, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Psychological Consequences

Hello, I am a psychology student at Davidson College. For my senior capstone project I would like to write an additional section in this article concerning the psychological implications of human trafficking. I noticed in the "Consequences" section, there is only a small paragraph about implications of trafficking victims, which contains only a broad sentence about "psychological stressors." I would very much like to elaborate on this topic. In the next few days I will be posting a list of my sources and a general outline of the information I would like to contribute to the article. I'll gladly welcome any of your feedback along the way. Thank you! --Haschorr (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Student edits to begin adding more psychology under Consequences

Greta Munger (talk) 15:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Below is a brief outline of the additions I hope to make to the Consequences section concerning psychological impact of human trafficking.

Short-term Impact

  • Emotional Reactions/Self-Perceptions
  • “Breaking down”/Impact of objectification
  • Psychological challenges during trauma (Stockholm Syndrome, learned helplessness, dissociation)

Long-term Impact

  • Complex Trauma/Complex PTSD
  • Emotional Reactions/Self-Perceptions
  • Re-experiencing Trauma
  • Developmental/Sexuality
  • Social functioning

Psychophysical Impact

  • Chronic stress and the immune system
  • Substance abuse, self-destructive behavior
  • Effects of torture

Impact on Children: Developmental, Psychological

  • Note about impact on boys


Sources: (These are all review papers or compiled research reports)

Browne, A., and Finkelhor, D. (1986). Impact of child sexual abuse: A review of the research. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 66-77.

  • Discussion of short-term and long-term effects of child sexual abuse, specifically focusing on emotional reactions, self-perception, physical and somatic effects, sexuality, and social functioning.

Courtois, C. A. (2004). Complex trauma, complex reactions: Assessment and treatment. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 41, 412-425. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.41.4.412.

  • Discusses the nature of Complex trauma and its association with child abuse, domestic violence, human trafficking and prostitution.

Finkelhor, D. (1990). Early and long-term effects of child sexual abuse: An update. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 21, 325-330.

  • Looks at impact of child sexual abuse and particular impact on boys.

Galjic-Veljanoski, O. and Steward, D. E. (2007). Women trafficked into prostitution: Determinants, human rights and health needs. Transcultural Psychiatry, 44, 338-358.

  • Psychological instability leading to health risks including STDs and HIV.

Hardy, V. L., Compton, K. D., and McPhatter, V. S. (2013). Domestic minor sex trafficking: Practice implications for mental health professionals. Affilia, 28, 8-18. doi: 10.1177/0886109912475172.

  • In-depth discussion of psychological impact of sex-trafficking for minors with helpful information concerning "Trauma Bonds" and Stockholm Syndrome, when the victim can become attached to the perpetrator.

Hodge, D. R. and Lietz, C. A. (2007). The international sexual trafficking of women and children: A review of the literature. Affilia, 22, 163-174. doi: 10.1177/0886109907299055.

  • Additional information about general psychological trauma of victims, emphasizing how traffickers "break down" their victims psychologically.

Hopper, E. and Hidalgo, J. (2006). Invisible chains: Psychological coercion of human trafficking victims. Intercultural Human Rights Law, 1, 185-209.

  • Describes details of psychological coercion in human trafficking, including phases of control in recruitment, initiation, and indoctrination into the life of trafficked person.

McClain, N. M. and Garrity, S. E. (2011). Sex trafficking and the exploitation of adolescents. JOGNN, 40, 243-252. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2011.01221x.

  • Articulates psychological challenges victims face that keep them from escaping of seeking help: fear, Stockholm Syndrome, learned helplessness, substance abuse, disorientation, and panic attacks.

Peled, E. and Parke, A. (2013). The mothering experiences of sex-trafficked women: Between here and there. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83, 576-587.

  • Looks at how human trafficking impacts the mental health of mothers who are trafficked.

Rafferty, Y. (2013). Child trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation: A review of promising prevention policies and programs. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 83, 559-575. doi: 10.1111/ajop.12056.

  • Specifically discusses psychological impact for victims trafficked across borders: loss of language, support systems, understanding of culture. Also talks about psychological symptoms synonymous with torture victims.

Rafferty, Y. (2007). Children for sale: Child trafficking in Southeast Asia. Child Abuse Review, 16, 401-422.

  • Emphasis on abuse and trauma and how it is so profound because victims experience is so persistently (when, for example, trafficked for so long).

Rafferty, Y. (2008). The impact of trafficking on children: Psychological and social policy perspectives. Child Development Perspectives, 2, 13-18.

  • Psychological impacts for trafficked children, particularly those commercially sexually exploited. Addresses psychological and emotional manipulation, long-term impacts of trauma, psychophysical consequences, and behavior/development issues.

Segerstron, S. C. and Miller, G. E. (2004). Psychological stress and the human immune system: A meta-analytic study of 30 years of inquiry. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 601-630.

  • Psychological impact of chronic stress caused by trauma and loss.

Wilson, B. and Butler, L. D. (2013). Running a gauntlet: A review of victimization and violence in the pre-entry, post-entry, and peri-/post-exit periods of commercial sexual exploitation. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0032977.

  • Discussion of psychological consequences at three stages of commercial sexual exploitation common for trafficking victims. Also considers the psychological impact of objectification and commodification.

Zimmerman, C., Hossain, M., Yun, K., Roche, B., Morison, L., and Watts, C. (2006). Stolen smiles: A summary report on the physical and psychological health consequences of women and adolescents trafficked in europe. The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine: Daphne, 1-28.

  • Further discussion of depression, anxiety, hostility and PTSD, while also emphasizing the challenge of re-experiencing traumatic events.

Haschorr (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

References and organization both look good. Sequencing of subsections also makes sense. Remember that people hop around in reading Wikipedia articles, so make each little section as independent as you can
  • Methods: what kind of research supports these theories? Some sections will need more method details than others, helpful to keep in mind these descriptions: 3 research methods (experiments vs correlation vs descriptive); 2 data-collection (self-report vs observation); 2 research settings (lab vs field)
  • Figures and tables: be thoughtful. Wikicommons has lots of pictures that might be useful. You cannot copy directly from journal articles (copyright violation), but you can recreate a figure and then donate it yourself. Greta Munger (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I like how you organized the material, but I think you may want to make more subsections under the big ones. For example, "long term impacts" is a good overarching heading, but that could encompass a lot of information making it difficult for people to find what they are looking for. I would also make sure to spend some time on the methodology of some of the research. Dr. Munger really looked for that when I did this assignment last semester. I would recommend laying out the basic research design for about half or more of your articles when you actually go to edit the main page. This is a really broad topic, so it will probably make the page better if you focus in on the key research directly related to your headings. Overall, this is a really good start! Algillespy (talk) 15:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

A couple of thoughts. The Stockholm syndrome seems particularly germane to this article. I'm not familiar with the texts, but we have separate articles on sexual abuse, Child sexual abuse, and several articles on Victimisation. So only material that is specifically germane to trafficking should appear here. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 23:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

definition

i'not an english speaker so i'd rather not to edit the main article. i wanted to stress the fact that the first section it is not well done to me. instead of start from the definition it starts with a comparison. it will be better to start with the definition of the traffick, that actually i cant find in the whole page. sorry if i can contribute — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.25.152.145 (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I made some changes, but the section still needs work.2A02:2F0A:506F:FFFF:0:0:50C:DCC1 (talk) 06:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List_of_organizations_opposing_human_trafficking

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_organizations_opposing_human_trafficking. A move request of interest to editors of this article. Thanks. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Excessive references to sex trafficking?

The article seems to give a disproportionate emphasis to sex trafficking:

- The section "Sex trafficking" seems to be almost half of the article

- Even outside the section, in many instances is referred "sex trafficking" if it was the only kind of traffick. Example - in the "Structural factors" section, the opening paragraph is "A complex set of factors fuel sex trafficking, including poverty, unemployment, social norms that discriminate against women, demand for commercial sex, institutional challenges, and globalization."

Compare with "labor trafficking", probably the most common case of "human trafficking", who has a section with only one paragraph.--MiguelMadeira (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I revised the Sex Trafficking section today, as a copyeditor with a close connection to the issue entered emotive, non-encyclopedic content. The page, and especially this section, needs ongoing monitoring, which I will be participating in. I will look at the Lead next MiguelMadeira. Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 01:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Proposal To Condense Sex Trafficking & Create A New Page

I am an undergraduate student at Rice University who would like to modify the existing sex trafficking portion of this article in order to create a separate page for the topic. This article is extremely long and I feel this causes the topic of sex trafficking specifically to get lost in all the information. Sex trafficking is a global human rights issue and affects countless people, so I believe it deserves its own page due to its great importance and relevance to current human rights issues. There already exist pages focused on sex trafficking in particular countries so it seems that a parent article such as “Sex Trafficking” like I am proposing is necessary and would be beneficial to Wikipedia.

My revision to “Human Trafficking” will be focused on condensing the current sections on sex trafficking into one section that concisely summarizes the topic and provides a link to the new article I want to create, “Sex Trafficking.” I would pull from the current information on the topic and include it in this page as well as add more content. For the “Sex Trafficking” article I will have the following sections – causes, prevalence, consequences to victims, children, governmental efforts and legislation, and nonprofit advocates.

I see it has been awhile since someone has posted on this Talk Page, but if anyone has any comments or concerns, I would appreciate it if you to shared them. I am open to all suggestions. Does this proposal seem reasonable and something that would be beneficial to Wikipedia? Does anyone have an argument for why this new page should not be created? MBouchein (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm the ambassador working with MBouchein's class, and I discussed this with them recently. I think this is the right approach to take; there's clearly enough material to make a separate page on sex trafficking, and expanding it here would unbalance the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 04:57, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
MBouchein and Mike Christie, as noted in the #Excessive references to sex trafficking? section above, sex trafficking content was reduced from the article. Before that, the sex trafficking content was significantly heavier and had no way of getting lost in this article. Even after the cuts, I doubt that that sex trafficking could get lost in this article, especially since the term sex trafficking redirected to the Sex trafficking section in this article. But I understand the need for this topic to have its own article. As for MBouchein's creation of the Sex trafficking article by WP:Splitting content from this article, MBouchein left all the material in this article, which made the Sex trafficking article seemingly unnecessary. Per WP:Summary style. I cut out the vast majority of the content that MBouchein in. Perhaps MBouchein was working on, or was going to work on, condensing that section, as noted in the "19:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)" post above. The Sex trafficking article that MBouchein created needs a WP:Lead sentence, and a lead in general that better summaries that article. Per WP:Lead, content ideally should not be in the lead unless it is covered lower in the article. Flyer22 (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Also, as currently seen in the References section of the Sex trafficking article, WP:REFNAMEs were carried over to that article without the full references; that needs to be fixed, if those references are to be used there. Flyer22 (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I am in the process of fixing all these errors. Please give me some time. This is the first time I've worked on a new page and it has been a learning experience. You've caught me in the middle of my edits and revisions. I am going to add much more content to the spit page and you condensed the old article before I got the chance. I was just about to go back to get the original references to fix the issues with the references you just mentioned but you deleted the area where those sources appeared so it's going to take me time. Please bear with me and give me some time. Thank you for your help ;;Flyer22. MBouchein (talk) 21:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining, MBouchein. As you can see, I noted in my "21:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)" post that you were perhaps working on the WP:Summary style aspect. Flyer22 (talk) 21:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

S.O.A.P.

@Wtmitchell: Why are you reverting poorly written commentary back into the article? [1] --NeilN talk to me 12:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed your second reversion of this addition while I was in a WP:Huggle session. I had missed seeing your first reversion and the unreversion which followed. I've now looked at the article's history and see that your edit summaries said "Advert" for the first reversion and "Unsourced" for the second one; I only noticed the second one at the time. I looked at the reverted material and saw that a source had been cited. However, I saw on looking at the cited source that it didn't contain anything specific to S.O.A.P. I did a bit of googling and came up with what looked to me like reasonable supporting sources, so I unreverted your removal and cited the sources I had found. I don't know anything about S.O.A.P. beyond what little bit I gleaned during my brief search for possible supporting sources. I don't have strong feelings one way or the other about the inclusion of this material and did not attempt to critically evaluate its writing style. It seems to me that this material ought to be considered to presently be in the D phase of WP:BRD. Beyond my response to your question here, I don't have much interest in this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 18:45, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Many of your references were self-published or non-secondary sources with respect to S.O.A.P. I'm not adverse to mentioning it in the article but we need some secondary sources to show it's worth singling out. --NeilN talk to me 15:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
This message from another editor on my user talk page brought me back here. I see that you have re-removed all content mentioning Theresa Flores and S.O.A.P., along with cites of supporting sources which I had supplied, in these two consecutive edits. It does seem to me that the cited supporting sources you removed met the requirements of WP:SELFPUB and sufficiently supported the removed content. After having seen the message on my talk page I had googled up this additional independently published supporting source which mentions (lauds, in fact) Flores and S.O.A.P. and had been intending to add it to the (now removed) supporting sources I had earlier cited. Since you have removed the content which this additional source would have supported, since I don't have strong feelings one way or the other about its inclusion, and since I don't want to get drawn into a long discussion about this, I won't revert your removal and cite this additional source. If other editors with more topical expertise than I feel that Flores and S.O.A.P. have enough topical weight to merit mention here, I'll invite them to discuss that with you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 20:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Scottperry Instead of asking another editor to proxy edit for a user, how about joining this conversation yourself? --NeilN talk to me 02:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

It is my understanding that Proxy-editing necessarily involves banning someone. Are you trying to develop some kind of a case against me for my recent question to you in NPOV that you refused to answer? Please, let bygones be bygones. I see you as a great Wikipedia editor, with whom I have no problem. You very dutifully and thoroughly uphold WP policy, which I very much admire, especially when once you saved me from a potential ban that you knew I didn't deserve, despite the fact that I sense you probably are not exactly my greatest "fan". I will never forget that, and I owe you big time for that. I apologize, but I am quite confused by this remark of yours here. The article is where it belongs now, because you fixed it. I too suggested that Wtmitchell fix this article. What was the crime in that? Please explain. Scott P. (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Scottperry I'm not building any kind of case against you. I am trying to suggest that if you see issues with the article (my edits or someone else's - it doesn't matter) that you fix them yourself or at least discuss them on this talk page. I looked at Wtmitchell's talk page and was completely confused as to whether you think Dchandler735's edits should stay or go, or if you were disputing my edits to the article. I have no problem with any of these, but when you say "better add those cites yourself" it seems you want another editor to add back material you agree with. Again, if that's the case, that's fine, but let's have your reasoning presented here. --NeilN talk to me 02:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
OK. I assumed that Wtmitchell was planning on trying to work with the new editor Chandler to coach her on how to properly add the cites, and that he had restored the edit under the assumption that she had not yet been apparently scared away from Wikipedia for good by you. I then suggested that Wtmitchell should now fix the half finished edit himself, because Chandler apparently was unlikely to ever return to Wikipedia. After I read Chandler's plea to you on your talk page, and saw your response to her, I got a very strong sense that she was gone for good. And so she apparently is. I really believe that we need a new policy that strongly recommends special kid-glove treatment of newbies, as I am sure it is a rather terrifying and difficult experience for them when they are first reverted. As always, you followed policy to the letter when dealing with Chandler, but that's why I think we need a new policy for that. I know that you try to do the best you can with the time you have when you patrol for bad edits, but if we had had a special policy in place for that, perhaps Chandler would still be here. Scott P. (talk) 03:06, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Scottperry Unfortunately there's only so much you can soft-peddle "Please stop doing that" or "You can't do that" before the message becomes meaningless. Dchandler735 was making advocacy edits but if you can come up with better wording to stop that, I'm all ears. You can use my talk page if you wish to continue this and have no comments specific to this article. --NeilN talk to me 03:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I apologize, but I am totally at a loss now. I'm afraid it is late, and I do not have any further time for this strange line of questioning here or anywhere else now for that matter, until you start making at least some modicum of sense. Good night my friend. Scott P. (talk) 05:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Revenue Discontinuity

Perhaps I'm missing something major, but it seems to me like there is a huge continuity error in the article under the Revenue section. It first claims that the total revenue for trafficking in 2013 was estimated at USD $32 billion. It then claims that about 2.5 million people are bought and sold each year. This would, naturally, lead one to expect that the average price of a slave is around (32 billion/2.5 million) USD $12800. However, the quoted average price per slave is only USD $90, meaning that 355 million slaves would have to be sold each year to get to a revenue of USD $32 billion. So where is the error? This is not a small thing, as we are talking a couple orders of magnitude difference. Just from my intuition, $90 seems way to low a price, even in poor countries. Dragonfiremalus (talk) 02:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I took a quick look at this
  • The article cites https://www.secure.enditmovement.com/learn - (deadlink URL when I tried it) in support. Archive.org says that it's not archived. However, on another try https://secure.enditmovement.com/learn is a live URL for a web page which has "The average cost of a slave today is $90. The average cost of a slave in 1850, in the American South, is equivalent to $40,000 today. on it." Below that text, there's a link saying SOURCE> which navigates to https://www.freetheslaves.net/sslpage.aspx?pid=301.
  • https://www.freetheslaves.net/sslpage.aspx?pid=301 is a dead link, and archive.org says that it's not archived.
  • However, http://www.freetheslaves.net/about-slavery/slavery-today/ is a web page at that site which contains the text, "Slaves today are cheaper than ever. In 1850, an average slave in the American South cost the equivalent of $40,000 in today’s money. Today a slave costs about $90 on average worldwide. (Source: Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy.)"
  • Books.google.com has the full text of one edition of that book online here. On page 14, a section headed "THE OLD SLAVERY VS THE NEW SLAVERY" begins. That section compares the cost of slavery as ownership of human beings (old slavery, high cost per worker) vs. slavery as workers kept in bondage (new slavery, low cost per worker). A couple of pages further on it talks abut numbers in the same ballpark as the $40K vs. $90 comparison in the article (page 16 says $50K-$100K vs. $12-$23). I haven't found the $90 worker figure in the book, but that might have been in another edition.
It seems to me that the article might need some clarification here about "old slavery" vs. "new slavery", and some improvement in cites. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Before I posted this, I tried those sources and couldn't really find anything either. The only thing I did find was the statistic on freetheslaves.net, but their numbers seem impossible as well. I have sent a message to the organization asking for clarification on sources or how these numbers are even possible, but have not received an answer. IMHO, I feel these stated facts are in enough conflict and poorly sourced enough that they warrant removal from the page.Dragonfiremalus (talk) 04:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

External links cleanup

If there's anything here that isn't redundant or otherwise inappropriate per WP:EL, please identify it so we can discuss the merits of its inclusion. --Ronz (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I think the DMOZ link might be kept even though it is specific to women, as well as the link to the UNDOC "Global report on trafficking in persons" --Ronz (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

None of these are redundant and all of them are appropriate, and they all merit inclusion. They help improve the article. IjonTichy (talk) 17:31, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
It would really help if you picked some you feel are best and make a case based upon WP:EL.
Until then, there's no consensus so they stay out. --Ronz (talk) 18:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
No, you are not correct. These links help improve the article and enhance the article, and your wholesale removal of the links does not help to improve the quality of the article. Your comments on my talk page (both what you wrote and what you did not write, i.e, your failure to respond to the substance of my comments), as well as your edit warring to remove good quality content from numerous articles, and your demands that WP editors spend enormous amounts of time justifying each external link to you, appear highly bureaucratic, in my view. Since you appear enamored with formally and mechanically citing the dry, cold language of WP rules, regulations, policies and guidelines, while neglecting to carefully consider the spirit of the policies and the nuances of the bigger picture of how your edits degrade the article, you may want to read WP:Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. IjonTichy (talk) 20:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
From my quick look at the links, there are:
  • 3 links from the same place (the U.N.) - if any are kept from this source, only one. I can see keeping the one Ronz recommended.
  • 1 is a deadlink - delete, as deadlinks have no place in EL
  • Many are to non-profits / orgs - wikilink to the Wikipedia article for the notable non-profits in See Also and remove all ELs for these orgs
  • Some are political leaders talking about the subject, U.S. laws and a useless FBI page - Adds little to the encyclopedic knowledge of the subject. If there is information to be gleaned from these sources, it should be added to the article and these used as references
  • 1 is a Journal - Add to Further Reading if necessary, linking to the ISSN.
  • 3 are newspaper/magazine articles - This Wikipedia article seems well-written and cited and these may contain mostly duplicate info. If not, add the new information to the article use these as references.
As to the DMOZ link, I'd much rather have that DMOZ link here than this mass of ELs. If an editor truly feels that these external links belong here, I'd recommend creating a new one or reusing a DMOZ (or similar) container for these links and linking to that DMOZ site from here. Stesmo (talk) 21:31, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Human trafficking vs Contemporary slavery

What is the difference between human trafficking, contemporary slavery and historic slavery? I didn't realize there was a whole other page dedicated to contemporary slavery. I couldn't even find a link to it on this page. On the Human trafficking in the United States page, despite having a separate page for Contemporary Slavery in America, it defines human trafficking like this:

Human trafficking is the modern form of slavery, with illegal smuggling and trading of people, for forced labor or sexual exploitation.

However, there is a separate page for Contemporary Slavery in America. Should these be merged? At least they should refer to each other, probably with some sort of explanation of the difference. Here are some questions I have:

Is there a form of contemporary slavery that would not be considered human trafficking? (Maybe legal slavery, like pre-2007 Mauritania)
Is there a form of human trafficking that would not be considered slavery? (Maybe kidnapping of children for adoption)
Is historical slavery considered human trafficking?
What is the difference between historical and contemporary slavery? (Maybe pre-emancipation/post-emancipation for that country)

These are questions this article should really answer, even if it is something along the lines of "usually understood" or "generally accepted". Peculiar Light (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Review of and suggestions for the current entry

The current entry provides a thoughtful and thorough overview of human trafficking. Recent revisions have undoutebdly upgraded the quality of its content through the inclusion of material on structural factors (globalization, societal impacts, controversies/criticisms, anti-trafficking campaigns, among others. However, certain subsections would definitely benefit from further expansion. For instance, the current "Profile of victims" could use further elaboration of the demographic characteristics (i.e. national origins, socioeconomic status) of this affected population. Similarly, the "Problems with anti-trafficking measures" also could be improved through an explanation of in what ways the measures poorly identify the victims and demonstrate a lack of understanding of the issue. This could be partially achieved by further discussing the UK policy briefly mentioned. In a similar vein, the "Social norms" subsection under "Structural factors" does not currently contain any information whatsoever. The author should either remove the subsection altogether or insert text illustrating this aspect of structural factors.

Another potential area for improvement involves the addition of more subsections to the "Alternative perspectives" section. The "Third-Way Feminism" is the only other perspective thoroughly considered. This subsection does however briefly mention how "Third-Way Feminism" reconciles the dominant and liberal feminist perspectives. One could possibly delve into these two perspectives to provide a more thorough account of alternative perspectives. Moreover, the author could even include non-feminist perspectives if they wished to remain as comprehensive as possible. Just as a note, these are all merely suggestions and do not represent the official opinions of Wikipedia. Therefore, it is entirely up to the author's discretion which suggestions need to actually be implemented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwtwgt (talk • contribs) 04:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I definitely hope to add more to the profile of victims and of traffickers subsections, as well as the structural factors section. Third-Way feminism is the only thing I've found that names itself explicitly as an alternative perspective. I can probably say a little more about the liberal and dominant feminist perspectives, thanks for the suggestion! Kayceeho (talk) 00:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
"Third-way feminism"... did you mean Third-wave feminism?? Balleyne (talk) 18:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Emma Goldman

I think something should be said about what Emma Goldman had to say about the cause, etc. Here: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1910/traffic-women.htm Pepper9798 (talk) 04:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Radio Control of Human Beings

There seems to be a lot of misinformation out there about the technical requirements surrounding radio control of human beings. The consensus on the internet seems to be that controlling a human being is a short range affair requiring headphones, ear pieces, or even a helmet. I know controlling a human being's body to require none of these things.

A person being remote controlled might appear entirely normal to an outside observer. Conversely, some abnormal behavior may be explainable with the existence of radio technology capable of controlling a human being.

A human being may be unaware they are being controlled via radio.

It seems possible to radio control more than one human being at a time.

As for the human mind, it is important to note that it is part of the human body.

Radio control of a human body implies control over a human being, the human's bodily functions, including thoughts, speech, and other motor functions.

What is the relationship between consent and radio control of a human body? What is the relationship between radio control and the definition of a human body? What are the implications of radio control of a human body and the senders of such information?

I don't know how many antennas are required to achieve radio control of a human.

Is ensuring a human body adheres to a script, for example for achieving grace in a show, or help delivering words that would otherwise require memorizing a script an application of this technology, similar to a teleprompter?

What are the implications of radio control of a human being for human trafficking?

Seems extremely dubious. We'd need some especially strong sources to even consider hinting at such things per WP:EXCEPTIONAL --Ronz (talk) 16:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

below part failed verification

Please recheck reference before add this sentence back
Sex trafficking affects 4.5 million people worldwide.[1][failed verification] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.225.99.194 (talk) 10:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

It's right there in the citation ... "Of those exploited by individuals or enterprises, 4.5 million are victims of forced sexual exploitation." Graham87 10:39, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Forced labour, human trafficking and slavery". ilo.org.

"Ben is the God of Human trafficking?" Not sure if this is meant to be there....

Hi Wikipedia,

I have noted that from a Google search on "Human Trafficking", the search results show Wikipedia's "google summarized" article which includes the first sentence of the Wikipedia article, and then the text: 

 "Also remember Ben is the god of human trafficking"

which doesn't appear in Wikipedia's article.

Is this meant to be there? Just though I'd bring it to your attention in case you believe it to be incorrect or unwanted.

165.225.98.95 (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC) 2016-FEB-16 Robert W.

0811519222

hi wat re u doing right now♥♥♥ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.188.186.83 (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human trafficking. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:19, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Criticism section

An IP user blanked the criticism section citing WP:CRITS. However, this seemed excessive to, especially given that no effort was made to integrate the information into the article. Starting this discussion per WP:BRD. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

"Others argue that many of these statistics are inflated to aid advocacy of anti-trafficking NGOs and the anti-trafficking policies of governments" sounds like something written by a pedo, the section is rife with weasel and peacock words, most of the section cites spiked-online, whatever that is, and for real? Slavery is a form of human trafficking. Would we accept a "criticism of the concept of slavery" section in the slavery article? 104.234.242.144 (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human trafficking. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:43, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Human trafficking. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:43, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

None conform aspects in society in relation to female trafficking. (whom hiring/purchasing/forcng)

None conform aspects in society in relation to female trafficking. (whom hiring/purchasing/forcng)

There are two little known/touched upon aspects of/in female trafficking>

I) female 40+, in menopause wanting a second life through the care and maintainance of a daughters/girls unwanted/ forced/none forced pregnancy.

II) Anti-abortion laws that force a woman to keep the child of a nonewanted male, even though this male would/could have slacked off within the 1st 2 to 3 months of a matrimony. (con/fraudulent marriage, or marriage for erroneous reasons).

III) Sectarian teological groups whom cater to the above.

Some of this has been superceeded by laws and regulations that force a male to provide for the offspring, plus mayhaps the female, but this itself has resulted in beaurocratic and governmental overhead where that same happens, and with attempt to make a conglomerate expend for the damages of others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.91.87.64 (talk) 17:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human trafficking. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Human trafficking. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

No mention of The United States?

Human trafficking is happening everywhere, i believe we would have a little insight because its being heavily done in big industrial countries. I feel it is important to know this can happen anywhere at any time. These article are vital information i believe it should be added. Financiers and Sex Trafficking,[2] What About American Girls Sold on the Streets?[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nybaez (talk • contribs) 13:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, There is a mention of United the States but is not up to date. I would like to know what has been going on in the last past years on human trafficking. We could add a new organization that have started to help stop human trafficking. Atzirytrujillo (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
The United States section of this article identifies the Human trafficking in the United States article as the relevant WP:SS detailed article for that subtopic. Looking at the two articles, I see that this article seems to have more info on recent details than that article. It looks to me as if both articles need work to push the details into that other article and, possibly, to update both the summary info here and the more detailed info there. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

British English

This edit caught my eye. Out of curiosity, I looked back. I found that this earliest substantive revision does appear to use British English ("harbouring"). See MOS:RETAIN. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:32, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

UNODC Global Report Update

Hi fellow Wikipedians,

The UNODC updated the Global Report on Trafficking in Persons and released it on January 2019. I would like to update the following section under General where it states the report and give the current statistics? The citation is leads them already to the updated version of the report. Smelland (talk) 04:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

I updated the changes from the new 2018 UNODC Global Report on Trafficking in Persons. If I made a mistake or there needs to be more changes please let me know. Thank you. Smelland (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

US State Department Report is biased and political motivated

The Report of US State Department is probably biased and political motivated because all countries which are mentioned are all non-allies or even so-called Rouge States. The Situation in Ukraine for example is much worse than in Russia and Belarus and those in Cambodia for example is not much better than in Turkmenistan. And one relevant heritage country of victims of human trafficking (Yemen) is also not mentioned.--217.92.58.201 (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

WP:BIASED EvergreenFir (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Dumping.

One of the common elements in any human trafficking, is post labour/arraingement, dumping of the individual. In most any case, overtime, the individual is dumped to fend for themselves, and usually without the support or coinage relationship to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.44.66.92 (talk) 19:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

This is true, either dead or alive. EmGaGa (talk) 17:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

Lady Gaga's song Bad Romance is about sex slavery. Pepper9798 (talk) 05:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I may have missed this, but are there sources for this? EmGaGa (talk) 17:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I do remember the music video to be about getting auctioned off, but I'm not sure about the song itself. EmGaGa (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Refs to latest cases

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 03:42, 30 August 2021 (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): Dfranco3.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2022 (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. Peer reviewers: Tmaldona.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Atzirytrujillo, Aussie2400.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 February 2021 and 6 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bphilip0000.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Commercial demand for sex

This paragraph seems dismissive rather than informative. I don't mean to be rude but I had to check the sources just to reassure myself it wasn't written by someone with a strong degree of bias. Jeszjesz (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Human_trafficking/Archive_4&oldid=1214185073"