Talk:Communication in Project Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
* 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 ☺ | * 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 ☺ | ||
* 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” ;) | * 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” ;) | ||
| − | * 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 | + | * 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! ☺ |
Revision as of 19:09, 22 September 2015
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.
- Maybe some of the limitations could be evaluated.
- The bibliography is missing.
- 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.
Wiki feedback from s117318
- Figures are easy to understand
- Make figure 2 smaller
- Great with references
- Why capital letters for your headlines?
- More structed layout.
- Interesting topic, and very important!
- advantages and disadvantages?
- Add a discussion/conclusion
- And a bibliography
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! ;)
- 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 ☺
- 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” ;)
- 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! ☺
