Talk:Critical Path Method in Construction Industry

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Content)
(Content)
Line 32: Line 32:
 
<pre style="color: red">Annotated bibliography with references and follow-up section added</pre>
 
<pre style="color: red">Annotated bibliography with references and follow-up section added</pre>
 
*Could include further discussion or just suggested reading about CPM computer programs mentioned
 
*Could include further discussion or just suggested reading about CPM computer programs mentioned
<pre style="color: red">Add comment here</pre>
+
<pre style="color: red">'''Add comment here'''</pre>
 
*Could be more critical or add more detail to limitations. maybe compare to alternative methods
 
*Could be more critical or add more detail to limitations. maybe compare to alternative methods
<pre style="color: red">Add comment here</pre>
+
<pre style="color: red">'''Add comment here'''</pre>
 
*I think you should reference to APPPM wiki articles over “real wiki”  articles. eg. PERT
 
*I think you should reference to APPPM wiki articles over “real wiki”  articles. eg. PERT
 
<pre style="color: red">I re-linked some of the links to DTU MAN Wiki pages. Great idea!</pre>
 
<pre style="color: red">I re-linked some of the links to DTU MAN Wiki pages. Great idea!</pre>

Revision as of 17:21, 27 September 2015

Anna: I don't have a lot to say about your abstract. It is a very good choice of topic and you have managed to focus on a specific method. The overall structure seems good also, so I believe this could be a very interesting and useful article when completed.


Note from the author - the response will be provided as red text:

This is how sample response will look like


Contents

Feedback from s150821 (reviewer 3)

  • The article is well written, its reading is fluent and really engaging. Its structure follows perfectly what it is requested by the assignment.
Thank you for the response. I went through the article once again and I've changed small mistakes to make it even more consistent
  • Images are exhaustive , they give the reader a quick understanding of the topic;
Thank you, it's really nice to hear that drawing all of them carefully made sense
  • External links to other pages of Wikipedia are a good idea, they make the article understanding easier;
As you mentioned, they help people to understand the content better. However, I re-linked some of them to connect to DTU MAN Wiki
  • References are punctual and from reliable sources;
References are now described and a follow-up material has been provided
  • The only deficiency of this article is in “Use Limitations” section; while situations in which this method can be applied are well treated along the article , use limitations of CPM are not as comprehensive as it is the whole article.

(Review 2, S145166)

Format

  • Very good abstract summarising article. Follows 'methods' article structure well
I really wanted to fit into the category of method description. However, please find additional follow-up material in annotated bibliography leading to a case-study
  • Good use of graphics
Thank you, it's really nice to hear that drawing all of them carefully made sense
  • some small grammar errors - read through again
I went through the article and repaired some of grammar mistakes. Thank you for the advice.
  • referencing error in 5. method advantages
Reference error repaired

Content

  • Add an annotated bibliography
Annotated bibliography with references and follow-up section added
  • Could include further discussion or just suggested reading about CPM computer programs mentioned
'''Add comment here'''
  • Could be more critical or add more detail to limitations. maybe compare to alternative methods
'''Add comment here'''
  • I think you should reference to APPPM wiki articles over “real wiki” articles. eg. PERT
I re-linked some of the links to DTU MAN Wiki pages. Great idea!

alex161 (reviewer 1)

In general I like the topic and I read it nicely, the structure seems good . Something is missing around the article but I think you are on a good way. Good job! Structure

  • Summary is written in a good and understandable way, I like it .
  • The figure are appropried with the topics
  • Remember to add the sources to the figures .

Contents

  • I think that the short history part is a good way to start , it is very concise and understandable
  • Try to explain bettter the example of CPM graph creation
  • The flow of the article is linear and logical without any problem to understand the topics .
  • Remember to add some brief summary to the bibliography
  • Maybe you should improve the limitations and method advantagess, with some sentences explaining a bit more than the bullet points .
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox