Talk:Scheduling: Critical path, PERT, Gantt

Revision as of 19:09, 18 February 2018

Text clarity Clear

Language Good

Description of the tool/theory/concept Good - consider spelling out PERT and briefly introduce a one liner on what PERT is

Purpose explanation Well addressed (e.g. clear that the Project Manager is the reader), but can be improved by clearly describing the article purpose e.g. "the purpose of this article is to address issues around... by combining PERT and Gantt..." (this is an example on how it could be incorporated in the abstract already written)

Title of the Wiki Title indicates that this article will be large (see "relevance of article")

References Good reference to PMBOK, but try to incorporate more relevant references from the mandatory list of references

Relevance of article Definitely relevant, but I would be cautious with writing about two relatively large topics PERT and Gantt. This could work as long as the article addresses the necessary depth beyond a normal web search.

Peer review from Nanna (18/02/2018):

Question 1: Is your Wiki article relevant? Yes, indeed. You have chosen a highly relevant topic for project managers. The purpose is explaned clearly in the first lines.

Question 2: Is the Wiki article usable? Since only the abstract has been written so far there is not yet provided a hands on guidande for the reader to apply the method. A lot of the points is to be answered when more then the abstract has been written.

The grammar and style is fine and easy to read. However, be aware of inconsistency of the usage of capital letter (eg. Critical Path vs critical path)

Question 3: Is the Wiki article credible?: Only one reference has been used so far but a good one. I am sure there is more to come.