Talk:Job Corps

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Job Corps. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Job Corps at the Reference desk.

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance).

Clean-Up and Corrections[edit]

This article requires clean up and corrections, Job Corps is open to anyone 16 - 24 who meet certain financial guidelines it is also not solely for at risk or highly at risk youth. There are many people from many different diversities and backgrounds, some just want the structure and education. Tim Thorpe 20:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As well, there are some exceptions to the age rule. I know a Job Corps student in her 50's, able to join because of a disability. 63.65.152.46 (talk) 17:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Locations[edit]

I'm not quite sure what the point is of the Locations section as it's nowhere near a full list.24.22.110.9 (talk) 09:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no point. It's all but impossible for us to maintain a complete and current list and, more importantly, it adds very little to the article and seems to be no more than a collection of random unencyclopedic information. We should take the list and break it down to three or four example daughter offices to explain the regional nature of the organization in clean prose that references the official list. The same applies to the program/course listings. MrZaius^talk 07:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation[edit]

Another editor (@Lkl9765:) replaced a cited statement from the Washington Post with another cited statement, with no explanation for the change. This should have been discussed here first, so that the discrepancy between the two sources could be understood. Lfstevens (talk) 20:47, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an external link[edit]

for more jobs from USA Just Click here I would like to add to the External Links section of the Job Corps Wikipedia page a link to my co-authored book, The Enigmatic Academy (Temple University Press 2012). The book is an ethnographic analysis of three "alternative" educational institutions. One of the case studies is of a US Job Corps center. To my knowledge, no other such study of a Job Corps center exists. It would be of value to scholars as well as potential Job Corps enrollees to know of and have reference to this kind of research into the institution. I offer this link in the interest of a free exchange of information on a site which otherwise itself seems promotional as it offers almost no critical perspective on Job Corps. Also, and importantly, there is no discernible commercial advantage to my posting this link as the book is produced by an academic, not trade, publisher; readers of this Wikipedia page could easily obtain a copy of the book from a library at no cost to themselves. Moreover, the book provides a rigorously peer-reviewed analysis of a Job Corps center from a highly regarded university press.Sociology7834 (talk) 01:16, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Job Corps. Please take a moment to review for joe Biden student loan forgiveness plan 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 16:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is, arguably, a violation of WP:SELFSOURCE, which states "the great majority of any article must be drawn from independent sources." In fact, this whole article appears to be a standard official statement from a government agency about itself -- NOT what Wikipedia aspires to publish. ~ Penlite (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV violation; no critical analysis or objectivity[edit]

This article appears to be almost entirely a standard official statement from a government agency about itself -- a violation of WP:NPOV -- NOT what Wikipedia aspires to publish.

Citations are almost entirely from federal government agencies (particularly the Job Corps, iteslf), rather than independent reliable sources. This is, arguably, a violation of WP:SELFSOURCE, which states "the great majority of any article must be drawn from independent sources."

A quick Google search for the phrase: "Job Corps" issues -- at any time -- finds an avalanche of critical articles, from major media and organizational sources, on the right and left -- and even government (particularly congressional) research and evaluation statements and documents -- noting countless serious problems with the agency, its operations, and the resulting safety of, and outcomes for, its young clientele.

Yet, quite uncharacteristically, this particular Wikipedia article makes essentially NO mention of these controversies, which are well-documented to extend over decades.

Given the inherent vulnerability of the Job Corps' broad target clientele (American teens and young adults from unfortunate circumstances) -- many of whom only get their info from conspicuous online sources like Wikipedia -- a more frank and thorough presentation of the facts, favorable and unfavorable, is important, and overdue.

This article urgently needs extensive improvement with objective, or even critical, content, from WP:RS sources. I'll add a few bits from my cursory research, but encourage other Wikipedians to "do the homework" and report the evidence in a more substantial and independent way. ~ Penlite (talk) 21:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added extensive additional details and documentation to the "Evaluation" section, and a new "Controversy" section. Both contain significant added details and criticisms of the program, from WP:RS sources, liberal and conservative, official and independent. Responding to the bulk of online commentary, mostly negative, I've reported published problems.

In the interest of fairness, I encourage other editors to seek out WP:RS sources that provide a contradictory, supportive view of Job Corps, and report their comments, as well.

~ Penlite (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]