Talk:Rapid Application Development in Extreme Project Management - Revision history

Faker at 20:29, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T20:29:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 22 September 2015
Line 9:		Line 9:

	;Clarity of the argument. Is there a logical flow to the article? Does one part build upon the other? Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?		;Clarity of the argument. Is there a logical flow to the article? Does one part build upon the other? Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
	:The article has a nice flow to it. Personally, I feel like the introduction (Background, Traditional, Extreme) is too lenghty as I read from the ~~headline~~ that the subject is RAD. I recognize that it is supposed to be in the context of XPM, but maybe it could be done more easily with linking to other Wiki-pages.		:The article has a nice flow to it. Personally, I feel like the introduction (Background, Traditional, Extreme) is too lenghty as I read from the title of the article that the subject is RAD. I recognize that it is supposed to be in the context of XPM, but maybe it could be done more easily with linking to other Wiki-pages.

	;Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?		;Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Faker at 20:28, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T20:28:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 22 September 2015
Line 6:		Line 6:
	;Clarity of writing. Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?		;Clarity of writing. Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
	: There are minor spelling errors, non-disturbing for the understanding of the article.		: There are minor spelling errors, non-disturbing for the understanding of the article.
	: There also odd/incomplete sentences here and there, but again, the meaning shines through without any problems.		: There are also odd/incomplete sentences here and there, but again, the meaning shines through without any problems.

	;Clarity of the argument. Is there a logical flow to the article? Does one part build upon the other? Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?		;Clarity of the argument. Is there a logical flow to the article? Does one part build upon the other? Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

Faker at 20:28, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T20:28:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 22 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Kristine:		Kristine:
	Hello, interesting idea for an article. Remember to follow the structure suggested for this type of article and remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool.		Hello, interesting idea for an article. Remember to follow the structure suggested for this type of article and remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool.

			==Reviewer: Faker, review1==

			;Clarity of writing. Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
			: There are minor spelling errors, non-disturbing for the understanding of the article.
			: There also odd/incomplete sentences here and there, but again, the meaning shines through without any problems.

			;Clarity of the argument. Is there a logical flow to the article? Does one part build upon the other? Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
			:The article has a nice flow to it. Personally, I feel like the introduction (Background, Traditional, Extreme) is too lenghty as I read from the headline that the subject is RAD. I recognize that it is supposed to be in the context of XPM, but maybe it could be done more easily with linking to other Wiki-pages.

			;Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
			:Yes, most definitely.

			;Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work? Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
			: The general tone of the article is very impartial and professional and seems to be very well cited.

			;Is the article properly linked within the Wiki to other relevant articles and category summaries?
			: Yes, there are several well-placed links, but the article could easily be more concise if more were implemented.

Kristine.clemmensen.rotne at 14:39, 16 September 2015

2015-09-16T14:39:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 16 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Kristine:		Kristine:
	Hello, interesting idea for an article.		Hello, interesting idea for an article. Remember to follow the structure suggested for this type of article and remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool.
	Remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool.

Kristine.clemmensen.rotne: Created page with "Kristine: Hello, interesting idea for an article. Remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool."

2015-09-16T14:33:36Z

Created page with "Kristine: Hello, interesting idea for an article. Remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool."

New page

Kristine:
Hello, interesting idea for an article.
Remember to mention both the application options as well as the limitations of the tool.