|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Kristine:
| |
| − | Interesting subject, as the finance can be a major showstopper for projects.
| |
| − | I am not exactly certain if you are going to describe a specific tool in your article?
| |
| − | Have you considered how you will relate this subject to project management? (You don't need to answer me on these questions, just make certain you consider it yourself)
| |
| − | Furthermore I can recommend to look at the main page when figuring out how to structure your article.
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Feedback from 113129 ==
| |
| − | * The beginning sections consists of a lot of short sentences – they are fine, but maybe you can combine one or two of them? It’s just a suggestion ☺
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * The financial management structure-figure is good, but not cropped very well. Maybe you should crop the “empty” areas away from the picture, so the figure becomes clearer? ☺ Maybe also make the picture a bit bigger? It’s a good figure! ;)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Maybe add an explanation/introduction to the table? It brings forward some interesting points, which could be explained in depth. ☺
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * The language in this article is very impressive. It’s easy to read and easy to understand, yet you keep the level high and avoid “dumbing it down”. There are a few “mistakes” here and there, but they are so minor that it hardly matters.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Remember to start with capital letters in BOOT/BOT and BOO.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * The key words (although good to have) could maybe be moved to the beginning of the article? It seems a bit strange to almost be in the middle of the article, and suddenly key words appear ☺ Just a suggestion!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In the “When is PF appropriate?”-section, you start a sentence with “have little uncertainty”. The following text seems to be lacking some punctuation!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Just going to remind you of the [link wiki] tag in the implement-section, in the Controlling the risks-section and in the benefits-section! ;)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Once in a while, sentences are either cut off or starts out of the blue. An example: “hen the ratio of debt to equity” in the “Planning Project Finance”-section. The following sentence ends without a punctuation and the sentence overall seems confusing as well.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * First few lines in “Arranging the financial package”-section are a bit strange. Maybe they should’ve been bullet points?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * The benefits-section is really good; I suggest maybe making a bullet list with keywords and explanations to the different benefits. Like a summery from before, but also more “straight forward”, making it easier to see just how many benefits there are. Just a suggestion! ☺
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Remember to fix the ref-link in the limitations-section!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Overall I think this was a really well-written and interesting article. I felt like I really learned something new. Other than a couple of strange sentences here and there, I really can’t put my finger on anything specific. Great job! ☺
| |
| − |
| |
| − | // This concludes the feedback from 113129
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | ==Feedback from s150821 (reviewer 1)==
| |
| − | *The topic of the article is in line with Project Management themes;
| |
| − | *The article structure well follows the “method” structure requested by the assignment and provide a clear explanation of how article develops.
| |
| − | *Section where are explained various format of PFI is a bit hard to understand also because of argument complexity. Maybe it would be better to explain more in detail what are the differences between various format of PFI.
| |
| − | *The table at the beginning of the article is a really good idea but maybe with an introduction could be better;
| |
| − | *References are well done, enough in quantity and quality ( they all refer to reliable sources);
| |
| − | *Basically article is well written except some mistake about capital letters ; to make clearer the understanding of the article it would be better to write in bold some important concepts.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | // This concludes the feedback from 150821
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Feedback from Dimak (reviewer 3)==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Hi,
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I really liked your article and I believe that you developed this topic by using a nice and clear structure. I also believe it is really nice and helps the reader follow your thought when you give various examples after explaining distinct points. The references are sufficient but there are some points that you can add some more. There are some general remarks that I would like to make :
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In my opinion at some points of your article you should try to connect the sentences and use connectors more often.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * Do not forget to start with capital after a dot.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * It would be a nice idea to enlarge the image you use in section 1 and connect it with the text (write a sentence as a label for instance).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * I also believe that the table you use afterwards has some really interesting points but in my opinion you should write a few words and name it (e.g. Table 1: Comparison between Conventional and Project finance). Also, I think that the title of the table (Comparison Conventional Finance Vs Project Finance) should be centered in order to make it looking better. Finally, try to add some references here.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In section 2.1, do not forget to start with capitals when explaining each form. I like a lot the key words section.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In section 4, I suggest that you use some references. A general remark that applies to all sections could be to maybe use some more images to illustrate the things you are suggesting and thus give more illustrative examples.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In section 4.3.2, I think it would be nice to develop a bit further the "PMI in portfolio management" section but again that is only a suggestion.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In section 5, I believe that you can create different paragraphs and use connectors to improve even more the flow of your arguments. Another idea, could be to use some bullet-points.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * In the limitations section, I find your bullet-points very interesting and I think it would be nice to write a small paragraph as an introduction and as a connection (in contrast) to your previous section.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * I believe that you will fix the reference in section 7 when you review your article.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Good job. You created a nice and well-structured article that it is easy to follow even for someone who is not familiar with the topic. I wish you good luck with your final article.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Dimitris
| |
