Talk:Fault tree analysis

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 17: Line 17:
 
* Maybe you should consider moving history part to the top of your article before Big Idea.
 
* Maybe you should consider moving history part to the top of your article before Big Idea.
 
* A conclusion and an annotated bibliography would be a great idea to finish your article with.
 
* A conclusion and an annotated bibliography would be a great idea to finish your article with.
 +
 +
Some small changes to you article you will be done in no time, keep up the good contribution to science.

Revision as of 18:40, 22 September 2015

Anna: Very nice, I like that you have chosen Risk Management as the overall topic but narrowed your scope to only talk about a specific tool. Nice to see that you have already thought about the structure also.

Gaetangarnotel - Reviewer n°3
Hello :)
First of all, I want to say that I think that your article is quite good, I liked it when I read it, and in overall, it has been clear to me. Yet, I have some recommendations that you could follow if you think that they are relevant:

  • In your introduction, I would not talk about the limitations of the method yet. As I consider it, the introduction aims to tease people, give the will to read more. In fact, it is in the conclusion that I would summarize the all article and write one or two sentences on the limitations. By the way, you should definitely write a conclusion. This part is absolutely fundamental.
  • In the "concept and purpose", we cannot read very clearly the figure. You have many solutions to fix the problem. First, try to summarize a little and get rid of some parts. Second, change the colors to create a better contrast. Third, put a little window instead of a big one and ask the reader to go to the picture's page so we have it in its real size. Moreover, if you say "figure 1 shows", you should actually put "Figure 1:..." under the picture.
  • I would say that the "history" part should be more elaborated. I have the feeling that such a method comes from a long time so you may find more information to share on that point. But I may be wrong.
  • All in all, I would say that your big parts would benefit from having a small introduction to explain the main lines you will tell about.

As a final word, there is still work to do so you can hand it in but you are on the right track.


s103745 - Reviewer n°1
First of all thanks for a great article about the Fault Tree Analysis, you have done a great job and you meet almost all the requirements of the Wiki article guide but there are some few points you may consider about.

  • Great job on figure 1 but the quality of your figure is not good maybe you should create a caption for your figure and make it little smaller.
  • An introduction for the Application part is missing, it will be better if you give a short introduction to where the FTA is used or can be used.
  • Maybe you should consider moving history part to the top of your article before Big Idea.
  • A conclusion and an annotated bibliography would be a great idea to finish your article with.

Some small changes to you article you will be done in no time, keep up the good contribution to science.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox