Talk:Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "Anna: In regards to the choice of topic, I feel like this article does not really fit any of the two types of articles that we want to see for this course. An idea could maybe...") |
Lassehoier87 (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Anna: In regards to the choice of topic, I feel like this article does not really fit any of the two types of articles that we want to see for this course. An idea could maybe be to focus on a specific tool that could help a manager to be a "mindful manager" in order to narrow the scope of your article down. | Anna: In regards to the choice of topic, I feel like this article does not really fit any of the two types of articles that we want to see for this course. An idea could maybe be to focus on a specific tool that could help a manager to be a "mindful manager" in order to narrow the scope of your article down. | ||
| + | |||
| + | LasseHoier87 reviewer 3 | ||
| + | |||
| + | The article is not finished as stated in the section ”To the reviewer”. I have therefore not reviewed the part where the author is writing ideas to the rest of the article. I will comment on what is available at the time of the review. | ||
| + | |||
| + | (Wiki article Peer Review template is used. To see question see "Wiki Article Peer Review and Peer Evaluation") | ||
| + | |||
| + | Formal aspects: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Free of grammatical, spelling and punctuation error. Maybe change “We” to more formal style | ||
| + | *Written in a fine engaging style, short sentences also leading nicely to the next point. | ||
| + | *I think the figures is ok, but maybe the figure with a lot of text is not suitable (you have a tendency to skip it) Maybe some bullet points with a very short description would be better?! | ||
| + | *The figures are understandable, but I think “figure 1” should be enlarged. | ||
| + | *The choice of figures is fine, but the label is missing. Use [[file….|none|thumb|caption]] or similar to get label on the figure | ||
| + | *The tables and figures is referred to in the text and works fine. | ||
| + | *Regarding copyright on the figures. I can not see any reference in relation to the figures. | ||
| + | *I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine. There are some small things, as mentioned earlier, the placement of the figures, layout of figure. But overall the formation is nicely done. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Content aspects: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *For practitioners the early version may be a bit theoretical, but if some examples of use could be made, the full understanding would be good. | ||
| + | *I think the article fits the purpose of this course very good. It is dealing with some key issues in term of system engineering and the behavior behind the development towards high complexity in society. | ||
| + | *The article is relating to the project management category. But could be used in other aspects also. The article is categorized well within the content categories. | ||
| + | *It is hard to evaluate the length of the article at this point, but looking at the “thoughts” of the author – I doubt it will too short. | ||
| + | *The logical flow through the article is fine. It seems like there will be a red thread through the rest of the article as well. | ||
| + | *The starting summary of the article should describe the content in a more detailed way. | ||
| + | *The sources and reference material is illustrated fine in the end of the article, but should of course be completed with “full name of author, title, year etc.” | ||
| + | *The sources and reference material is fine and is mostly relying books, standards and journals. Fine | ||
| + | *There are no link to other Wiki APPPM articles, but one link to oxford dictionaries, which is of doubtful relevance. | ||
| + | *Difference between own opinion and statements from literature is hard to say at this point. The article is mostly describing the basic ideas of mindfulness and cognitive biases. | ||
| + | *There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism. | ||
Revision as of 21:20, 22 September 2015
Anna: In regards to the choice of topic, I feel like this article does not really fit any of the two types of articles that we want to see for this course. An idea could maybe be to focus on a specific tool that could help a manager to be a "mindful manager" in order to narrow the scope of your article down.
LasseHoier87 reviewer 3
The article is not finished as stated in the section ”To the reviewer”. I have therefore not reviewed the part where the author is writing ideas to the rest of the article. I will comment on what is available at the time of the review.
(Wiki article Peer Review template is used. To see question see "Wiki Article Peer Review and Peer Evaluation")
Formal aspects:
- Free of grammatical, spelling and punctuation error. Maybe change “We” to more formal style
- Written in a fine engaging style, short sentences also leading nicely to the next point.
- I think the figures is ok, but maybe the figure with a lot of text is not suitable (you have a tendency to skip it) Maybe some bullet points with a very short description would be better?!
- The figures are understandable, but I think “figure 1” should be enlarged.
- The choice of figures is fine, but the label is missing. Use none|thumb|caption or similar to get label on the figure
- The tables and figures is referred to in the text and works fine.
- Regarding copyright on the figures. I can not see any reference in relation to the figures.
- I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine. There are some small things, as mentioned earlier, the placement of the figures, layout of figure. But overall the formation is nicely done.
Content aspects:
- For practitioners the early version may be a bit theoretical, but if some examples of use could be made, the full understanding would be good.
- I think the article fits the purpose of this course very good. It is dealing with some key issues in term of system engineering and the behavior behind the development towards high complexity in society.
- The article is relating to the project management category. But could be used in other aspects also. The article is categorized well within the content categories.
- It is hard to evaluate the length of the article at this point, but looking at the “thoughts” of the author – I doubt it will too short.
- The logical flow through the article is fine. It seems like there will be a red thread through the rest of the article as well.
- The starting summary of the article should describe the content in a more detailed way.
- The sources and reference material is illustrated fine in the end of the article, but should of course be completed with “full name of author, title, year etc.”
- The sources and reference material is fine and is mostly relying books, standards and journals. Fine
- There are no link to other Wiki APPPM articles, but one link to oxford dictionaries, which is of doubtful relevance.
- Difference between own opinion and statements from literature is hard to say at this point. The article is mostly describing the basic ideas of mindfulness and cognitive biases.
- There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism.
