Talk:The Stage-Gate Model/phase-gate process
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===Answer 1=== | ===Answer 1=== | ||
− | ''The article explains the | + | ''The article explains the model, methodology and its stages so well. A suggestion can be a section at the end which link or compare this method to the others methods or defending pros and cons of this methodology. '' |
===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
===Answer 2=== | ===Answer 2=== | ||
− | '' | + | ''The argument is clear and easy to read. Just maybe can add introduction to explain the flow.'' |
===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
===Answer 3=== | ===Answer 3=== | ||
− | '' | + | ''I didn't see any mistake in grammar and spelling. Easy to read and clear to understand.'' |
===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
===Answer 4=== | ===Answer 4=== | ||
− | '' | + | ''The figure is relevant and understandable. But I have never seen video clip in a wikipedia article! maybe not necessary. '' |
===Question 5 · TEXT=== | ===Question 5 · TEXT=== |
Revision as of 19:26, 25 February 2019
Contents |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Behzad Sanie
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
The article explains the model, methodology and its stages so well. A suggestion can be a section at the end which link or compare this method to the others methods or defending pros and cons of this methodology.
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
The argument is clear and easy to read. Just maybe can add introduction to explain the flow.
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
I didn't see any mistake in grammar and spelling. Easy to read and clear to understand.
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
The figure is relevant and understandable. But I have never seen video clip in a wikipedia article! maybe not necessary.
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Y
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here