Talk:Risk Management in Construction Projects
Contents |
Abstract Feedback
Text Clarity; Ok.
Language; Ok.
References; Ok.
Try to avoid a too generic article.
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Daniel Campos Rivera
Question 1 · TEXT
Quality of the summary:
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 1
Good summary. It is very clear what you are going to tell about Risk management, maybe you have to speak more how is related the uncertain effectiveness and uncertain efficiency and the 4 fundamental elements with construction projects
Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Is the argument clear?
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?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 2
Nice explanation of the Management Risk. Good flow but I find that there is not relation with construction projects and the subtitles yet, . The article has a nice flow. Very nice with links and the biography of the references, but maybe is good idea to speak about the biography and how is related with construction projects with examples, arguments, illustration etc
Question 3 · TEXT
Grammar and style:
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 3
No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I can understand the whole idea, however i am not the best to speak in this topic i am spanish native speaker .
Question 4 · TEXT
Figures and tables:
Are figures and tables clear?
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 4
I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the arcticule, however you know that you haven't finish yet and should put more pictures. But good choise of picture, they are easy to understand.
Question 5 · TEXT
Interest and relevance:
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 5
It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text "
Question 6 · TEXT
Depth of treatment:
Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 6
There is a lot about Risk Management on the internet, PMBOOK Project Management Book is a good guide to work in civil engineering project and is to early to think that is significant contribution because the author haven't finished yet
Question 7 · TEXT
Annotated bibliography:
Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 7
Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Hoda Vazirinasab
Question 1 ·
Quality of the summary:
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 1
....
Question 2
Structure and logic of the article:
Is the argument clear?
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?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 2
...
Question 3 ·
Grammar and style:
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 3
...
Question 4 ·
Figures and tables:
Are figures and tables clear?
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 4
...
Question 5 ·
Interest and relevance:
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 5
.... "
Question 6 ·
Depth of treatment:
Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 6
...
Question 7 ·
Annotated bibliography:
Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 7
...
