Talk:Project Risk Management and Project Risk Management Processes
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
* The link between all the parties of the article are not so clearly liked. | * The link between all the parties of the article are not so clearly liked. | ||
* the references used appear to be really focused on the topic | * the references used appear to be really focused on the topic | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Reviewer 3: s142911== | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Nice! Seems like you are already close to finish it. I like the structure. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *The text has a nice flow. The writing style is good as well. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *You are following properly the “methods” structure, maybe I would discuss a bit more the limitation section. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *I would reduce a bit the length of the overview. I think it should give a quick idea of what the article is about. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Regarding figures: do you think figure 1 and 2 are necessary? If so, I would put it on the side rather than below the text. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Before using an acronym, be sure to have already indicated it after its full name. i.e. Project Risk Management(PRM). | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Regarding the source, remember to add them the figures. In addition, remember to add a brief summary of each source, and write them following a common structure: i.e. Author, year, Title, editors. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Since project risk management is a wide topic, you could add some aspect or go more in depth in aspect which are already in it. | ||
Revision as of 21:57, 22 September 2015
Josefs says: Hello, I like your idea and topic. But I suggest to chose a focus area, otherwise, your article may end up a bit generic, and not as interesting as it could be because it is too broad. E.g. the root cause areas, or the process or...
s150905, Review 1:
Hi, the article appears complete, with a clear topic and its satisfied all the characteristic of the Wiki-article.
Formal aspects
- The part dedicated for the description of the method is clear but i think there is something missing to make the reader more confident with the topic
- It presents a little lack of punctuation and a few spelling errors
- I like the use of the images that help the reader understand better each part
Content
- The article is less than the required words and, while you read it, you feel like there is something missing.
- In my opinion the whole article appear a little generic
- The link between all the parties of the article are not so clearly liked.
- the references used appear to be really focused on the topic
Reviewer 3: s142911
- Nice! Seems like you are already close to finish it. I like the structure.
- The text has a nice flow. The writing style is good as well.
- You are following properly the “methods” structure, maybe I would discuss a bit more the limitation section.
- I would reduce a bit the length of the overview. I think it should give a quick idea of what the article is about.
- Regarding figures: do you think figure 1 and 2 are necessary? If so, I would put it on the side rather than below the text.
- Before using an acronym, be sure to have already indicated it after its full name. i.e. Project Risk Management(PRM).
- Regarding the source, remember to add them the figures. In addition, remember to add a brief summary of each source, and write them following a common structure: i.e. Author, year, Title, editors.
- Since project risk management is a wide topic, you could add some aspect or go more in depth in aspect which are already in it.
