User:TeresaVarrialeGonzalez/Cross-cultural communication/Allylynch1 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username): TeresaVarrialeGonzalez
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: Cross-cultural communication

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? No.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, although it does focus on capitalism and globalization often but I suppose that's relevant.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Just the focus on the business side within the U.S of cross cultural communication but it's valid. It should focus on other countries as well.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it's informational. Just heavy on citing articles from U.S. researchers.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, but I'm sure there is more info to be discovered.
 * Are the sources current? Somewhat. The most recent is 2015. Teresa has found articles in 2017 that I hope are added.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I can see.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It only includes 1 photo which doesn't really show communication of any kind, and not of drastically different cultures.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, but again doesn't address communication.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, just wish there were more as this topic can be interesting with visuals.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? N/A
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? N/A
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? N/A
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? N/A

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? Yes. Needs the articles Teresa referenced in her bibliography.
 * What are the strengths of the content added? The updated articles in 2017. They would be the most recent articles cited.
 * How can the content added be improved? More pictures and visuals, and more international researchers mentioned.