Talk:Communication in Project Management

Discussion

KB1991, reviewer 1:

• The article is in general very well written both with regards to the grammar/spelling and the content. It is interesting to read.
• The abstract gives a good insight in the topic.
• Good with a lot of references to relevant sources.
• Nice with the figures, they were good and understandable. Would be nice if figure 1 was referred to in the text. -Author: Done.
• Maybe some of the limitations could be evaluated. -Author: Done.
• The bibliography is missing. -Author: Done.
• I am not sure about what to comment on the length of it, since I’m not sure you are completely finished yet. But everything there is written now seems relevant from my point of view.

• Figures are easy to understand
• Make figure 2 smaller -Author: Done.
• Great with references
• Why capital letters for your headlines? -Author: Fixed.
• More structed layout. -Author: Fixed.
• Interesting topic, and very important!
• advantages and disadvantages? -Author: The importance of making a communication better is described in the introduction. It can only bring advantages.
• Add a discussion/conclusion -Author: Done.
• And a bibliography -Author: Done.

Reviewer 2, 150477

The article has been accessed the 22/09/2015 at 21 p.m.

* Overall overview.

The presentation and the overall writing are very clear and clean. The article is well organised and structured with the explanation how important is the communication in a Project Management followed by the analysis and methods to ensure the quality of the communication. It is also completed, with 3000 words. Even without any knowledge of the subject, it becomes accessible through the article. Maybe the last part is too short compared to the others.

* Formal aspect.

No mistakes noticed, the vocabulary is very precise and the formal aspect of the Wiki seems to me perfectly mastered. The references and the links inside the article are well used in order to explain technical aspect through other pages but your links just appear but do not work. The last part to enlarge. An example could be a good idea to bring a concrete application of the methods.

* Schemas and photos

They are used in harmony within the text but we do not see the reference to the pictures in your development. The last picture is maybe too technical and a farther description of it can be a good idea. -Author: Done.

*Links, connections and comprehension.

The article describes the subject in a logical way. It is a method description so the structure choice makes perfect sense to me. Maybe you can describe farther the communication plan with the picture to ensure people who will read your article that it is really important. -Author: Done.

* Bibliography

The references seem to be very serious one. The explanations for each reference may be more developed. And you have to fix the links inside your text. -Author: Done.

* Conclusion and advices:

From my very own point of view the subject is perfectly explained and presented. It is easy to understand and it is important with this topic so basic in Project Management but so important. A description more precise of the communication plan would be perfect. The use of one example may improve your article in a concrete way. The actual formal presentation is perfectly acceptable and describes the importance of the communication in Project Management in a logical way.

113129, reviewer 3:

• WHY ARE WE YELLING? All jokes aside; you should probably change your titles to not be in all caps, as it is very dramatic and distracting to look at! ;) -Autor: Fixed.
• Good abstract! It works as it should, explaining what the article should be around.
• Remember to make the references correctly. You can find a guide on how to do it on the front page, or – if you want – feel free to just copy the structure used in my article ☺ -Autor: Fixed.
• The pictures are good, and it’s great that you’ve made them big enough for us to see what is going on. Maybe figure 2 can/should be re-made, so that there aren’t search-highlights on “communic” ;) - Author: Haha, thanks, fixed!
• So far the article seems very well written and interesting. I’m not sure if it is finished, but I would suggest bringing in a section for discussion – talk about which methods and tool are used most often, why/why not certain tools are used more than others, etc.. Maybe you could also add a nice conclusion to wrap up the article in the end? Just a suggestion. Overall a good article! ☺ -Author: Done.