Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/International labor standards/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Hi Guys! I've listed the article international labor standards for peer review because I've recently made substantive additions to this article in the areas titled "monitoring international labor standards" and "violations of labor standards" as part of a classroom assignment for Rice University. I was hoping to see if there would be any super awesome editors who would be willing to read over those two sections in particular to see areas that could be improved. General feedback over the entire article would also be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!, Hihappy21 (talk) 01:24, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program

[edit]
Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.[?]
  • If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
  • You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
  • Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]
  • This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

  • Checklinks found multiple dead links out of a total of 40 external links.

-(tJosve05a (c) 23:28, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from LT910001

[edit]

The two sections are looking good. Unfortunately I don't know enough about this topic to make informed advice, but I will try my best. Comments below:

  • I would say that I find the language quite difficult to parse, and that overall this article would benefit from some simplification to improve readability.
  • This includes trimming verbosity and reducing jargon. Additionally, some of the conjunctions could also be cut.
  • In the given sections, I am having a bit of trouble finding the 22.9% in the source, could you point me to it? At any rate I find this a strange figure to include given the variation between countries.
  • The platitude "Operating under the mantra that “decent work is safe work,” the ILO Programme on Safety and Health at Work and the Environment, SafeWork, has the goal of making work safer for all. " could be cut
  • I am a little confused about the article's scope, as although it states that these are possibly issues that may be external to ILO issues, some sections (particularly "Unsafe working conditions") more-or-less entirely focus on the ILO and its implementation, which may be better covered in the corresponding article. Are there other examples of standards (such as those promulgated by the UN, required by the US for fair trading status, reinforced under the WTO, enforced as signatories to WHO treaties, or other agreements) that are relevant and worthy of mention?
  • Gender discrimination is given a lot of prominence in workplace discrimination. Is this prominence warranted, given the many other forms of discrimination that exist? (See WP:UNDUE). At any rate, suggest move this example down and in the first part of this section focus on discrimination in totalis.
  • What standards are violated is not mentioned in workplace discrimination
  • Statement "From the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire", suggest rephrase as modern examples. Some earlier examples of unsafe working conditions may include the tens of thousands of Chinese workers who died building the great wall, slaves used to construct the pyramids, and hunters of the hunter-gatherer variety.

Thanks for your edits during this course. In summary, this article reads quite well, but could be improved by ensuring that this article is more than a summary of the ILO's activities, and by making the language more accessible to lay Wikipedia readers. I hope this is helpful. Kind regards, --LT910001 (talk) 15:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]