Talk:Project management within volunteering organisations
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
LasseMadsen (Talk | contribs) (→lol) |
LasseMadsen (Talk | contribs) (→Feedback by Lasse Madsen) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
**References: <nowiki>[[project management]]</nowiki> | **References: <nowiki>[[project management]]</nowiki> | ||
**Additional reading section | **Additional reading section | ||
| + | * My suggestion will be to put the introduction before the list of content to make a read-threat | ||
'''Content aspects''' | '''Content aspects''' | ||
* The first thing that i noticed was the sources used to support the main arguments in the article. I miss academic sources, ie. looking into 'project management in volunteering organizations' from Journals, DTU Findit or Google Scholar or similar. '''An example could be''' to provide a literature review and then comparing it to the method used by the danish scouts. Then '''reflections and a discussion''' on how they could improve their methods. | * The first thing that i noticed was the sources used to support the main arguments in the article. I miss academic sources, ie. looking into 'project management in volunteering organizations' from Journals, DTU Findit or Google Scholar or similar. '''An example could be''' to provide a literature review and then comparing it to the method used by the danish scouts. Then '''reflections and a discussion''' on how they could improve their methods. | ||
* | * | ||
Revision as of 16:43, 25 November 2014
Feedback by Lasse Madsen
Formal aspects
- The grammatical and spelling in the article is very fine, however some sentences can become a bit long, where I miss some "," or division into paragraphs. An example is: "Communication covers both the top down communication from management and the communication between the project leaders and the project team members about the tasks of the team member." from the section: Communication.
- I miss references to the figures in the text. And also the context of the figures.
- It seems like the author has made the figures him/herself which is positive. It makes sure that there is no conflicting copyrights.
- Overall structure i miss some more WIKI formatting, ie.
- bullet points (*),
- Categories: [[Categories:Management]]
- References: [[project management]]
- Additional reading section
- My suggestion will be to put the introduction before the list of content to make a read-threat
Content aspects
- The first thing that i noticed was the sources used to support the main arguments in the article. I miss academic sources, ie. looking into 'project management in volunteering organizations' from Journals, DTU Findit or Google Scholar or similar. An example could be to provide a literature review and then comparing it to the method used by the danish scouts. Then reflections and a discussion on how they could improve their methods.
