Talk:Lean construction

Revision as of 16:01, 28 November 2014

In general, a very nice setup of wikipage. Seems like proper use of the wiki platform.
Very good overview article of the theory on the field, and following the setup more or less to the letter
Really good length of article, especially considering last parts still missing at current time.
- Updated with last part.
Nice structure overview. Concise sentences and paragraphs making it easy to read though the article.
In general good language. However, you should consider a quick spell check in Word or other software also including grammar check (fx. customer). Also spell check figures and tables
- Consider whether the article should be written in UK or US English and/or look through spelling. Both words with ou and only o in text (fx. labour/behaviors). Also remember use of “z” vs “s” when considering UK vs US
  - Changed the words i found to US. Also used Word to correct some grammar and spelling.
- Consider single/plural forms (is/are, with/without “s” on endings).
  - Thank you, as far as I know it's changed.
Nice figures. Could perhaps be included, explained of referenced a bit more through the text. Also a bit difficult to see, whether own figures/tables or taken from elsewhere, and in that case whether they are copyright protected.
- I referred the the figures in the text, and added in what material they are based on.

Formal aspects:

Some grammatical errors, for example:
- Verbs in singular and plural: “These two interpretations are…”, “they together strive…”, “there are several…”
- Word order: “productivity spent hours”
- Past participles for irregular verbs: “spent”, “shown”
- Not appropriate use of auxiliary verbs: “does not recognize”
Some repetition can be avoided by using pronouns
In general, not too long sentences that help to follow what you are saying
You used very nice illustrations to explain the concept. Also useful summary tables
References are appropriately used
At the end of some sections you put two bullet points without introducing them before. Maybe you still have to work on them

Concept aspects:

The abstract, in general, is good. You get into the topic quite fast and this is nice for understanding what is all about.
The topic is interesting and is related to the subject
Really nice structure of the article
The length is appropriate for this kind of topic (aprox. 3000 words)
Many references are good to see that the sources are reliable
The text doesn’t seem to be copied and pasted. When necessary, you used inverted commas (that’s ok)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 *	Very good overview article of the theory on the field, and following the setup more or less to the letter
 *	Really good length of article, especially considering last parts still missing at current time.
+** Updated with last part.
 *	Nice structure overview. Concise sentences and paragraphs making it easy to read though the article.
 *	In general good language. However, you should consider a quick spell check in Word or other software also including grammar check (fx. customer). Also spell check figures and tables
 **	Consider whether the article should be written in UK or US English and/or look through spelling. Both words with ou and only o in text (fx. labour/behaviors). Also remember use of “z” vs “s” when considering UK vs US
+*** Changed the words i found to US. Also used Word to correct some grammar and spelling.
 **	Consider single/plural forms (is/are, with/without “s” on endings).
+*** Thank you, as far as I know it's changed.
 *	Nice figures. Could perhaps be included, explained of referenced a bit more through the text. Also a bit difficult to see, whether own figures/tables or taken from elsewhere, and in that case whether they are copyright protected.
+** I referred the the figures in the text, and added in what material they are based on.
 == Review - B wiki ==