User:Steph.sparks/Evaluate an Article
Communicating among different cultures is an interest of mine. I'm in a mixed racial marriage, so cross-cultural communication is a daily practice for me.
Lead
[edit]The article includes an introductory sentence, but it's not clear in describing cross-cultural communication. It feels like it has been written and edited by many different people. The Lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections and it's too concise. However, the Lead doesn't include information that is not present in the article
Content
[edit]The information in the article's content is relevant to the topic. The content is up-to-date. I honestly couldn't get through all 14 paragraphs that discuss the challenges in cross-cultural communication qualitative research (QR). This section is too lengthy and, as it's written, it does not belong in a Wikipedia article. It needs to be cut down.
Tone and Balance
[edit]The article is neutral. The tone of the article is unbiased and meant to be an encyclopedia entry. I couldn't find any claims that were biased, but I did find the viewpoint of QR challenges to be overrepresented.
Sources and References
[edit]A large number of facts in the article are backed up by reliable sources. The links I checked did work. However, there are large paragraphs that don't have a single source. Many facts are not backed up by any source.
Organization
[edit]I can tell this article has been written, re-written and edited by many different contributors because some parts of the article make perfect sense, and are well-written, while some others are not easy to read. I can tell some of the information in this article was rushed, probably trying to meet a deadline for a class, while some other information is well-thought out and executed.
I think the lack of organization is mainly because the topic of cross-cultural communication as an academic subject is too broad to be organized in one Wikipedia article. Maybe there needs to be multiple Wikipedia articles and links within this main article leading you to other pages.
Images and Media
[edit]There are only 2 photos, and one isn't well captioned. The images are laid out in a visually appealing way. It appears they both adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
Checking the talk page
[edit]The conversation focuses on whether cross-cultural communication and intercultural communication are the same or not, and whether these two articles should be merged or not. The article has been rated B-Class.
Overall impressions
[edit]The article lacks depth in many areas that are important to the topic. The theories section, for example, is so small it completely gets lost in a sea of additional information. I've found this article to be too detailed in areas that are not as paramount. The authors of this article have significantly focused in the qualitative research challenges. I recognize these challenges are important to the research of cross-cultural communication, but 14 lengthy paragraphs of qualitative research in a Wikipedia article just isn't right. Cross-cultural communication expands far and wide, this article needs better organization. Overall, the article is poorly developed.