User:209.252.248.150/sandbox

Article evaluation Unfree Labor


 * The article about unfree labor is relevant to the topic.
 * There was nothing that was distracting.
 * The information is up to date, however, some of the sources are from years ago, but the information is still good.
 * Penal Labor does not have a defintion, it would be helpful to have that.
 * It would also be helpful if there were more examples.
 * The article is neutral and not biased.
 * There are the different forms of unfree labor, there could have been more examples for further explanation for some of the forms.
 * The links to the citations work.
 * The sources support the article.
 * A lot of the sources are from books, five of the sources are from the same author but from different books.
 * Some of the other sources are from ILO. ILO reports about the topic at hand so they could be seen as being a biased source. However, they also report about other things that may not relate to unfree labor so they could also be seen as not being biased.
 * None of the information is reported as being biased.
 * In the talk pages there is conversations about the article as having left winged bias.
 * There are also conversations about changes that happened in 2005.
 * It is a level-5 vital article.
 * It has a C-class rating.
 * It is a wiki-project for human rights.
 * The article also has high importance.
 * Some of the names of the types of unfree labor are different from what was taught in class., however, they still have the same meaning.