The link provided looks like its a history website that is geared towards students and so it's trying to have a "pros" and "cons" perspective to Stalin's industrialization. A not-so-small nitpick I have already is that it uses "Russia" interchangeably with "Soviet Union", which is already incorrect as about half of the Soviet population wasn't ethnically Russian, and about half of the Soviet population didn't live in the RSFSR (Soviet Russia).

The site says:

"Living standards: these generally rose in the 1930’s despite the obvious problems with food production and shortages elsewhere. Some people did very well out of the system especially party officials and skilled factory workers."

I'm genuinely not sure what they are measuring as "living standards", as they clearly note that urban housing was horrible, and that "problems with food production" actually means "a famine that killed millions of people". They even note that agricultural production in 1939 was at the same levels as 1928 (pre-collectivization) despite an overall increase in the Soviet population. As far as I can tell, life expectancies, although increasing overall over the total period of Stalin's rule (1924-1953) bounced around quite a bit in the 1930s, mostly because of the aforementioned famine (which also caused malnutrition in tens of millions more).

Similarly the site says "there was a stable government under Stalin" as a "pro" while also noting that the 1930s saw the purges, resulting in the imprisonment and death of hundreds of thousands of military, government and party officials. Doesn't sound particularly stable, actually!

There's a small kernel of truth in that the mid-to-late 1930s (outside of the Purges) were considered a period of relatively good progress in terms of living standards - the famines were over (although there was a fear of an almost-famine in 1936). However here it was mostly a public campaign based off of a speech Stalin gave in November 1935, where he stated "Living has become better, comrades. Living has become happier." This became an official theme, especially in cities, and there was a push for more amenities for workers (amusement parks and the like), as well as a push for a new constitution in 1936 that established socialism as "built" and that (on paper) granted a wide variety of individual rights.

I discuss some comparisons of Soviet living standards in 1930s even with pre-World War I living standards here, drawing on Sheila Fitzpatrick's Everyday Stalinism. Overall, her take is that living standards weren't really better, and in many cases (like food and housing) were worse, except in specific indicators like education and literacy. And that's for urban workers - peasants, who were still the majority of the population - had things really bad because of collectivization and the famines, and tens of millions moved to cities to find work (which was a feature, not a bug, of Soviet plans).

Ultimately, however, it's all a bit of a red herring because the First and Second Five Year Plans of the 1930s weren't trying to improve peoples' living standards. They were trying to industrialize the USSR, and this meant first and foremost developing primary industries like coal mining, electrical production, and steel production, not providing housing or consumer goods for regular citizens. The next stage of industrialization (once these primary goals were met) was on armaments industries, and this was more often than not the trade-off the Soviets made all the way to Gorbachev, even when they invested more into improving ordinary Soviets' living standards. But especially under Stalin's rule, military needs absolutely came first, and the living standards of Soviet citizens a distant second.