User:Etcetera2001/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Labor camp

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I decided to look for articles relating to labor, and I chose to evaluate this article because of its S-class designation. For a topic that is quite common, it was interesting to see how little information it had available. My preliminary impression of the article was that it lacked depth and felt in-cohesive. Furthermore, the majority of the article felt incomplete and only offered links to more specific detailed articles.

Evaluate the article
The lead section did not flow very smoothly, and it did not provide a brief description of the article's major sections. It included information that was not present in later sections, specifically Convention no. 105 of the United Nations International Labour Organization. It also included very general sentences without providing an argument; specifically how labor camps have similar aspects to slavery and prisons. The last part of the lead section alluded to the use of labor camps in the twentieth century, but it did not go into further detail in the actual section.

The content of the article neglected to provide a full-picture of what labor camps entail. There are aspects of the article that are missing, such as a more detailed history of the precursors. It currently has 2 sentences in the Precursors section that ends around the time period of pre-Revolutionary France. It then jumps into the next section of Labor Camps in the 20th century, but there is no smooth transition nor is there a description for the various countries listed. There are only hyperlinks provided. I recommend to add a few sentences that summarize the information provided in the specific hyperlinks to make the article more informative. It then jumps into the Labor Camps of the 21st Century, but only provides 3 sections on China, North Korea, and the United States. There is very limited information in these subsections, and the section on North Korea is duplicated in both the 20th and 21st Century sections.

There are only images relating to labor camps used by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, which can indicate an overrepresentation of European labor camp history.

In checking the Talk page, there are discussions of grammar and removal of sections for being too broad and therefore inapplicable in the article. Several contributors removed sentences for being inaccurate or using claims based on a single source.

My overall impressions of the article is that it requires a lot of work to become more substantial and therefore beneficial to the audience. As it stands, the information is disorganized and limited in nature. The redirection of hyperlinks is useful, but it could be greatly improved by creating more in-depth content summaries.