Talk:Rapid Application Development in Extreme Project Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| 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? | ||
Revision as of 21:28, 22 September 2015
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.
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 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?
- 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.
