User:NEMO LEGEND/Business Communication/Hattiehruza Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

NEMO Legend


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NEMO%20LEGEND/Business_Communication?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Business communication

Evaluate the drafted changes
I really enjoyed how you added on to the first subheading of "Intro". I feel that the content you added flushed well with was already established. The first section of the article tends to be the most important and I feel what you added was just enough to improve it. Adding more to the first section than what you already have may be a little overwhelming to read. Overall the first section that you contributed towards was written really well and also structured very clearly.

For the second section of "Edit: New sub heading (International Business Communications)", the information that was added about the study they did in international studies made a lot of sense towards what you were overall trying to convey. I think the example that you mentioned and then also explained why that example related to the subject was a good move. However, maybe a little bit more additional information could be helpful. One helpful thing you could communicate is the relation of international business with domestic business.

For the third section I appreciate what you are trying to convey but it seems a bit choppy. Saying that, I know it is a rough draft so there is time to clean that up. I think what you are trying to convey with technology is important or maybe even vital towards the article as a whole, so maybe adding additional sources and information towards that section could be educating for the readers.

I think your overall tone is good and neutral towards the article, there doesn't seem to be any bias or agreement towards any of the sections which is good for the readers to understand. The lead section could have a little bit more information as to what the article is trying to get across just because the lead is so important. For me, reading an article if I am not drawn in during the lead it is often hard for me to continue reading the rest of the article in depth.

I did click on a few of your link and they all seem to work well. To be completely transparent I'm not sure how many people actually go back and read the direct source but it is good to have in standing condition when someone does decide to go back.

I think your contributions have added depth and important statements to the overall article but there is still some improvement to be made, but that is the beauty of rough drafts.

Good job!