Talk:Scheduling: Critical path, PERT and Gantt
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
|
|
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | ==Feedback on Abstract:==
| + | |
| − | {|
| + | |
| − | |'''Text clarity'''|| Good
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Language'''|| Good
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Purpose explanation'''|| Good
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Title of the Wiki'''|| OK but could mention something about a comparison or the fact that the article is made to help choosing the right method
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Relevance to curriculum'''|| Relevant
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''References'''|| Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references
| + | |
| − | |-
| + | |
| − | |'''Other'''|| You need a headline for the abstract and the "content box" is before the abstract and the abstract is a bit long. This topic very broad. If you go for it then focus on which method to choose depending on the project and the comparison of the methods since this it what is useful for the reader. So focus on your part 2 and keep 3,4,5 to a minimum. Otherwise it might be better to focus your article so it is not too broad. Let me know if it does not make sense.
| + | |
| − | |}
| + | |
Latest revision as of 15:25, 4 March 2019
