User:Superunsubscriber/Camming/Thisismyusername31 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Superunsubscriber / Alex


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Superunsubscriber/sandbox


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Camming

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The lead section gives an effective and concise overview of the definition of camming and what can be expected from the remainder of the article. I think it could be helpful to include a section on how the subject directly relates to privacy issues. I think the rest of the lead section does a good job of summarizing the job and also giving an introduction to the other sections. It could be more clear if the subsections of the article were more explicitly listed out in the lead section. The background and industry sections give good context for understanding camming. The background section gives a good overview of the history behind camming and the industry section helps the reader understand the modern context of camming. For the legal issues sections, I think it does a good job of explaining why worker treatment is an issue in the camming industry. But I think it could be helpful to add specific details on what the illegitimate treatment of cam models refers to and give specific examples of common ways that workers are mistreated. I think it could also be useful to have a specific section on privacy issues concerning cam modelling so that there is a more direct way for the readers to infer the privacy related challenges of camming. I think the organization of the sections is good because it first provides context and background before moving into the legal issues of the industry. I think it could be helpful to directly cite after each sentence and use the citations in the annotated bibliography.