Talk:Project Integration Management - Revision history

S150793: /* Feedback */

2015-09-22T15:12:09Z

Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 22 September 2015
Line 13:		Line 13:
	*Annotated Biography; remember that the references should have a short description		*Annotated Biography; remember that the references should have a short description
	*Referencing; I think you should find more academic articles at least if it is possible do not refer to Wikipedia.		*Referencing; I think you should find more academic articles at least if it is possible do not refer to Wikipedia.

			==Reviewer 2, s150793==

			* Topic and length: I think that the topic should be more specific and you should explain how the tool is used. The length of the article is too short, just around 1000 words.

			* Structure: I think that the structure of the article doesn’t really follow the “methods” structure. I would recommend to have a look at how this type of articles should be structured.

			*Images and tables: I think that the use of images and tables will help the readers to understand better the article. Remember to indicate the sources of the figures and to reference them in the text.

			*Writing style: Try to connect and relate the different ideas that you want to explain.

			*References: If you try to use more high quality references such as books and articles, your article will be more accurate. You should also reference all the passages of the text to reflect the sources where the information comes from. Remember to write a brief summary of each source.

DI2009 at 14:57, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T14:57:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:57, 22 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Anna: I think you need to be a bit more specific in scoping your article in regards to which method/tool you want to go in depth with.		Anna: I think you need to be a bit more specific in scoping your article in regards to which method/tool you want to go in depth with.


			=Feedback=
			==Reviewer 1, DI2009==
			*Topic; It seems like an interesting topic (method description). However I had a hard time to figure out, whether or not the title matches the content.
			*Introduction; Due to the missing link between the title and the topic, it would have been nice to get a description of the article. Maybe it could start with: “This article describes how Six Sigma can be used in Project Management…”.
			*Structure; A structure which gives the reader an overview of the points and states a small conclusion, would help the reader, both catch the readers interest and make it easy for the user to know what the article is about.
			*Section introduction; a short introduction to each section would help the reader know what to expect.
			*Text; I believe that the article is not finished and still some more elaboration is missing.
			*Figures and illustrations; It would be nice with some figures or illustrations to catch the readers interest and help the reader.
			*Titles; the titles could be more descriptive e.g. “Overview of the article” and “Idea with using Six Sigma” etc. This will also help the reader in what to expect.
			*Annotated Biography; remember that the references should have a short description
			*Referencing; I think you should find more academic articles at least if it is possible do not refer to Wikipedia.

AnnaGreve: Created page with "Anna: I think you need to be a bit more specific in scoping your article in regards to which method/tool you want to go in depth with."

2015-09-16T15:20:36Z

Created page with "Anna: I think you need to be a bit more specific in scoping your article in regards to which method/tool you want to go in depth with."

New page

Anna: I think you need to be a bit more specific in scoping your article in regards to which method/tool you want to go in depth with.