User:Cmhernandez/Intercultural communication/Jhulty Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Cmhernandez


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cmhernandez/Intercultural_communication?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


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

Evaluate the drafted changes
I hope that you don't mind, I took the liberty of cleaning up some grammar and spelling within the draft, although I did not change any words.

Lead:

I think your lead does aid to the general understanding of intercultural communication, however I think that it should supplement the lead that already exists instead of supplementing it. With the introduction of terms like biculturalism and multiculturalism, it will aid more in the quick and dirty understanding that is presented in the lead. I also think there is an opportunity there to link to other Wikipedia pages for these words, as I see that they exist, although they are sparse. Biculturalism multiculturalism.

Cultural Fusion Theory:

This was a good way to introduce a new theory to the page and bring in another lens, something that is very important in understanding cultural differences and intercultural communication as a whole. Instead of writing the word "they" in the second sentence, I think you should clarify who this is, as it could be interpreted as many different groups of people. You could also possibly define some of the terms you use within the final sentence of this section.

Intercultural Adaptation:

In the sentence, " Intercultural adaptation is a new two process, this is between the host culture as well as the individuals outside/home culture," I'm not quite sure what you mean by a new two process. Does this mean there is a reciprocal relationship that exists? Possibly a give and take that exists between the two parties? If so I think it may be advantageous to explain that within the page as there is already a section that exists on intercultural adaptation, however it doesn't really explain the two way dynamic. It might even be helpful to add a picture here to show the back and forth.

Acculturation:

This section clearly needs some work in the given article as it seems very scattered and contains some information that seems like it could be separated from acculturation such as assimilation. You should talk about who Young Yun Kim is if you are going to directly cite them within the article, as to the everyday reader they will have no idea who this is. I also think that asserting her claim of complete assimilation, it will be important to explain both sides of this, as it creates an argumentative dynamic between two opposing views. It will be important to make sure that you don't take a side when t comes to this and that adequate information is presented for the reader.

Sources:

All the sources are of good nature and say what you state that they say.

Tone:

Like I stated earlier in acculturation, the tone should remain neutral nd attempt to explain and to explain and present as much information from many different lenses for the reader. Therefore, I think there is still some more information to either add or cut out some pieces. Your work is a great supplement to some of the work that already exists within the article and I believe this will be a great and substantial change to the article, aiding readers in understanding the general idea of intercultural communication as well as some of the prevailing theories.