Talk:Different sides of Project Management Scheduling - Revision history

S175507: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-19T18:02:14Z

Abstract Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 19 February 2018
Line 22:		Line 22:
	<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search		<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
	</ol>		</ol>


			==Feedback 1 \| Reviewer name: ''Aksel WAtson''==
			===Question 1 • TEXT===
			'''Quality of the summary:'''
			===Answer 1===
			'' The summary has a nice length – it gets to the key point quickly. However, there are many grammar and spelling mistakes that should be corrected. I believe it will be a valuable contribution for anybody wanting to learn more about project management.''

			===Question 2 • TEXT===
			'''Structure and logic of the article:'''
			===Answer 2===
			''Only the abstract has been writing, therefore it is not possible to comment on the flow of the article. I suggest, that a table of content is created to ensure that each subject is relevant within project scheduling''
			===Question 3 • TEXT===
			'''Grammar and style:'''

			===Answer 3===
			'' The style seems fine, however I can only see the abstract. As mentioned in Q1, there are a lot of grammatical error, that should be corrected. I suggest, making sentences shorter and more precise, and only write what is necessary instead of listing up, so many items.''
			===Question 4 • TEXT===
			'''Figures and tables:''
			===Answer 4===
			'' There are no figure or table in the article.''
			===Question 5 • TEXT===
			'''Interest and relevance:''
			===Answer 5===
			'' The article is very relevant, since project scheduling is used in any company and any industry. I feel that this is portrayed nicely in the abstract, however its hard to say before more text has been writing.''
			===Question 6 • TEXT===
			'''Depth of treatment:'''
			===Answer 6===
			'' Not yet.''
			===Question 7 • TEXT===
			'''Annotated bibliography:'''
			===Answer 7===
			''There is only one source, however this source is both relevant and denoted correctly in the text and in the end''

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-14T07:58:56Z

Abstract Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:58, 14 February 2018
Line 12:		Line 12:
	<li> What will the reader get out of reading this?		<li> What will the reader get out of reading this?
	</ol>		</ol>


	'''References''' Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references		'''References''' Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Text is coherent '''Language''' Minor errors e.g. writing "need" when "needed" is required. Do not use first person narrativ..."

2018-02-14T07:58:41Z

Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Text is coherent '''Language''' Minor errors e.g. writing "need" when "needed" is required. Do not use first person narrativ..."

New page

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Text is coherent

'''Language''' Minor errors e.g. writing "need" when "needed" is required. Do not use first person narrative e.g. "we"

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Okay, but go back to basics. Define what scheduling is and make references to appropriate standards. The abstract needs expansion

'''Purpose explanation''' Good, but can be improved:
<ol>
<li> Consider explaining the structure and content of the article to align reader expectations
<li> What will the reader get out of reading this?
</ol>

'''References''' Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references

'''Relevance of article''' Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Project Manager or Sponsor etc?
<li> Try linking to a knowledge area e.g. "Project Time Management"
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
</ol>