Talk:Gantt Charts as a Tool for Project Management

From apppm
Revision as of 20:51, 22 September 2015 by DanielKrogh (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Josef: Hello, I like the idea for your article. Please make sure to follow the suggested structure for "method" articles.

Reviewer 3: DanielKrogh
Formal aspects
  • The structure of the article is made as expected from type 1 article.
  • There is few errors in the text. Be careful to use daily speaking language like e.g. “didn’t” instead for did not.
  • The sentences are well formulated are in the right length.
  • All the important points in the article are illustrated in figures.
  • It is easy to understand the figures and they are well explained.
  • Almost every figure is referenced in the text, but where Figure 1? Make sure that each figure has its own number and are referenced in the text.
  • All the figures is referenced.
  • There is a lack of sub-headings which could be made easily. The figures size are proper and does not need to edited.
Content aspects
  • It is a highly interesting topic and hence it is relevant for a practitioner.
  • The length of the article is as expected.
  • The flow of the article has a logical structure and have no comments on that.
  • The summary fitted fine for this size of a project and highlighted the most important things.
  • I do not have access to the reference list, so I cannot comment on that.
  • The author has begun to make an annotated bibliography but is not finished yet.
  • The overall impression is that there is no trace of plagiarism.

It is a very interesting topic, but also very relevant. If I should come with any suggestions, it would be if there could be an example of any real life cases where it went good/bad. The article is easy to read and the flow is good.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox